Enigma
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 13,969 
|
Post by Enigma on Oct 5, 2018 15:36:56 GMT
Far simpler just to think of Aspirin as a means to an end.  By analogy, I've always been baffled by all the energy that got poured into the creation/evolution debate. Evolution doesn't preclude "God" and creation doesn't preclude the possibility that evolution was how "God" decided to do it.  Perhaps. But once the bell rings, seems there's no turning back. Seeing the inherent emptiness of all appearances, if it's complete, forever changes the way 'causality' in general is seen. We might still engage that appearance, but it's with the full acknowledgement of 'going along with' it vs. buying into it fully. Zaklie |
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Oct 5, 2018 21:43:47 GMT
Yes, of course I do. I just don't think of them as due to collective beliefs. From whence dost thou thinketh they arise? Sorry, that's classified. Top Secret. So ya' know what I'd have to do if I told ya', right?  |
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Oct 5, 2018 21:45:25 GMT
That's beyond my casual layman's knowledge of the topic. My impression of the scientific consensus is that using the substance causes changes in various chemical processes and nerve structures that lead to pleasure during the addiction process and pain during the withdrawal process.
Like I said at the outset, regardless of how you think of the causality, there's an underlying practical, experiential definition. You can set the causality question aside and think of it as: substances that can be associated with these two different processes of pleasure/addiction-withdrawl/pain are considered potentially addictive (depending on person and situation), while substances that can't be, aren't. Absolutely, let's look at the practical experience. I don't care much about what science thinks, cuz I've caught it with it's pants down once too often. Is there a pleasure producing drug that is not addictive or a discomfort producing drug that is? Not offhand without stretching the boundaries of the meaning of addition, no. |
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Oct 5, 2018 21:51:25 GMT
The objective factors are related to those interests, but the human adult isn't responsible for the objective factors, only their subjective reaction to those factors. Of course. ok then, so I hereby move to amend "have nothing to do with" to "are not determined by and sometimes even unrelated and often not effected by or completely out of reach of any actions taken on those interests". |
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Oct 5, 2018 22:00:21 GMT
Yes, that's the pain/suffering feedback effect, so the absence of expectation can lead to minimal or no suffering, and so minimal pain. But I still maintain that some people are in such a state that a painful process is inevitable, regardless of expectation. Also, I take E' to mean that nicotine or opiod withdrawl symptoms happen because of a sort of consensus that they should. I've dialoged with him enough over the years that I think I understand there's a deeper nuance to his meaning other than "everyone believes in gravity so you don't float (heh heh)", but I'm still not on board with it. I would rather say, the mind desires stability for the body, hence a stable platform from which to go about causing havoc. When there is a sense of instability from all the havoc caused, the behavior of that platform may reflect it. In the same way that the functioning of the body can be seen as a reflection of the mind, the functioning of the collective world body can be seen as a reflection of the collective mind. Creation begins and ends right here. Ok. Comrade. 
hmmm ... mind sounds for all the world ... like it's ... a rowdy teenager!  |
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Oct 5, 2018 22:03:43 GMT
The way I see it, these patterns that appear in consciousness involve limitation, those limitations come in a myriad of expression, including, generally speaking, the possibility of impossibility. Complex creations of form are of the nature that certain relationships are mutually exclusive. The mind can imagine the inclusion but the mind imagines a nonsense. A very shallow treatment of the topic is the Zen koan, "draw a square circle".
Timelessness is the case, but contextually, there is a bone, and there is a break in that bone. The pattern in consciousness is a sequence of events involving a process over time. Healing of a human bone takes time. The relationship between the appearance of the bone and the appearance of the break of the bone conspire to a constraint. Since anything is possible, constraints and impossibility are as possible as miracles, and also alot more likely. I don't think anybody's saying the appearance of impossibility can't happen, but even in the midst of that experience of impossibility, all things remain possible. (you're on the verge of creating a paradox, and you know what I think about those. )  I'd say the possibility of impossibility is knee deep in the swamp already but that you started it! |
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Oct 5, 2018 22:06:11 GMT
Causality, forming, re-forming: these all implicate a process. " Creation", involves time. There's some serious value to at least considering your ideas of flipping the sense of causality, for sure, but my point is that a person's body can get into a state where they are inevitably going to have to go through a painful process, regardless of whether or not they're suffering, and addiction withdrawal has the potential -- given the specifics of the person and their situation -- to be one of those processes. Yes, virtually inevitable, and for the same reason gravity is virtually inevitable. However, understanding WIBIGO has the potential to alter that process. There's what I call a sphere of influence where personal creation (creation that influences only the individual in question, for the most part) is concerned, and you would probly consider this the miracle zone. ok, yeah, just call me Bolie Jackson.  |
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Oct 5, 2018 22:11:02 GMT
Yes, we differ on this point. I see human adulthood as a matter of degree, and I see this as the furthest the human adult can go, when they account for the notion that there is a greater, holistic movement that leads to and in which context those interests appear.
But, if anything is possible, how is it that it's not possible for you to influence the interests that arise to you? Personally, I've found it to be a fun game to play, both in the past when I thought I was a people peep, and also now. It's just that now, the rules of the game have changed.  There are some caveats regarding the 'all things are possible' thing. The reason all things are possible is because Consciousness is the cause, and Consciousness has no boundaries. The person that we would have becoming his own creator is, himself, a creation of Consciousness and is virtually defined by limitations. Having said that, it IS possible for Consciousness to create the appearance of individual creation. Yes, I think we've come to a collective-consensus-belief-agreement at this point, as this was really what I was getting at, for sure. |
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Oct 5, 2018 22:13:28 GMT
Far simpler just to think of Aspirin as a means to an end.
By analogy, I've always been baffled by all the energy that got poured into the creation/evolution debate. Evolution doesn't preclude "God" and creation doesn't preclude the possibility that evolution was how "God" decided to do it. Yeah, I've had the same thought. Peeps sure are funny creatures sometimes. |
|
Enigma
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 13,969
|
Post by Enigma on Oct 6, 2018 6:12:17 GMT
From whence dost thou thinketh they arise? Sorry, that's classified. Top Secret. So ya' know what I'd have to do if I told ya', right? Oh, sorry. Yes, of course I understand.  |
|
