Are you Dead?

[Major. Rudiger]

Are You Dead?

Think About...
Im not talking about, your death, or your not braided in a grave. This is a open Question. I want to hear your answers... Then I'll post mine....

They're no ways to lose...

[Xvall]

I'm an illithilich.

[CommieBastard]

Am I dead?
Not in the sense of being an inanimate corpse.
Am I in an afterlife?
Maybe, but if I am then I am afterliving, not afterdead.
Do I feel dead?
Luckily, not so much anymore

[CommieBastard]

Originally posted by Drake [email protected] 10 2005, 02:56 AM
I'm an illithilich.
Someone plays too much D&D :P

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

Sleep-Communute-Work-Commute-TV-Sleep-Communute-Work-Commute-TV-
Sleep-Communute-Work-Commute-TV-Sleep-Communute . . .

I wouldn't say living in a post-industrial dystopia in which you construct yr meaning from what you consume is akin to being dead, but I would never call it "Living."

[Ian]

communute communute

[seraphim]

I don't actually exist so I can't die

[CommieBastard]

Seraphim, I can prove that you exist, at least to some extent.
If, like me, you have experiences, then you are aware that you have experiences. Whether these experiences pertain to anything meaningfully is irrelevant. The experiences exist in and of themselves. Therefore, if, like me, you have experiences you exist at least to the extent that you are these experiences.

If you do not have experiences then you exist within my perceptual reality as a division of that body of information within my experience that is www.revolutionaryleft.com, which is itself a part of the object of my experiences 'my computer'.

[seraphim]

But that's only cause u believe it to be so experience has no relevance none of us exist as physical beings only as ripples in energy caused by the pure expansion of the universe.

[CommieBastard]

I never made the claim that we exist as physical beings. In fact I said quite the opposite.
I made the claim that we are mental beings, composed of experience.

What is more I also stated that experience has no relevance beyond itself.

[CommieBastard]

energy and the universe are both physical phenomenon

[seraphim]

fair enough point taken

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

No, I am not dead.

[Major. Rudiger]

I think, some of you are on the right track... But I'm talking about are YOU doing as you want... are you making decision on your own... are you alive?... in a since that are you mentally alive, are you dead?

[MiniOswald]

in that sense major, i am well and truely dead, but then im an over-indulged, over-dependant little rat, i sacrifice doing what i want (not to sure what that is, as i have no ambition or goal or drive or whatever) and making my own decisions, I let others run my life so i can survive i suppose, bringing me to the frequent conclusion, do i want to survive? can i break away? if i do will it be any better than now? will it be alot worse? and what the fuck do i really want to do anyway?

[I've Defected]

i believe i must exist in some form or another...

it all depends on your definition of 'dead'. its just a word remeber, and it can mean different things for different people

[CommieBastard]

Major Rudiger, your point intrigues me.
Personally it is only recently that I have been developing in detail my personal philosophy, which has a number of tactics for avoiding the imposition of 'external' information on the 'internal' conceptual processes.
It is in this time that I have been feeling more alive than ever before.

Though it should be noted my philosophy has a number of applications which may be a factor that run into the interpretation and foundation of psychology, science and language.

[deathordeath]

I often think that maybe this is post reincarnation that we did did, and we've all been reincarnated into this real world, then again there's no way to know but yes I often think sometimes this must be hell in which I am in.

[monkeydust]

In the memorable words of David Brent "Cogito ergo sum so......"

No.

[I've Defected]

you mean Descarte?

translation: I think therefore I am

[Taiga]

Originally posted by Major. [email protected] 10 2005, 02:29 AM
Are You Dead?

Think About...
Im not talking about, your death, or your not braided in a grave. This is a open Question. I want to hear your answers... Then I'll post mine....

They're no ways to lose...
What the hell is this question about?
:huh:

[Major. Rudiger]

I really dont know.... i was out of it the night when i typed it in... and watching the doors moive like 5 times.... so forget about this post, it was a dumb question....

[Dwarf Kirlston]

Originally posted by Major. [email protected] 10 2005, 10:07 PM
I think, some of you are on the right track... But I'm talking about are YOU doing as you want... are you making decision on your own... are you alive?... in a since that are you mentally alive, are you dead?
are you making choices or not? Lack of Free Will is Death? Lack of mind is death? Lack of Control over your life is Death?

What exactly are we? "individuals" or "part of a community" or both?
How responsible are we for our actions? How responsible is our community?

... i noticed that you said afterwards "I was out of it". So it goes.

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

ergo cogito cogitatum Try that one.

[Dwarf Kirlston]

therefore I think thoughts?

-???

[The Apathetic Atheist]

I enjoy the question. As always I enjoy reading all of the posts before I reply so...

My "existance" goes as a meaningless pattern as well:

wake up-prepare-go to school-endure mental enslavement-go home-sleep-wake up-prepare-go to school-endure mental enslavement-go home-sleep-wake up-prepare...

I am not dead. I am in a coma.

[codyvo]

Well I'm not but Terri Schiavo is.

No, I'm kidding that is mean.

[Xvall]

I'll take the question seriously this time.

It is possible. Sometimes I think that I am god and that I simply created this world and erased my memories so that things are more interesting and less boring.

[Don't Change Your Name]

I am just a bunch of chemicals that can think.

[Xvall]

You're right. Hard to think about us being nothing but a bunch of atoms, and all events in the universe consisting of atoms slamming into other atoms.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I'm pink therefore I'm Spam™

*checks pulse* I definately seem to be alive.

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Originally posted by Dwarf [email protected] 25 2005, 12:16 AM
therefore I think thoughts?

-???

No, try harder.

[Dwarf Kirlston]

Originally posted by Pedro Alonso Lopez+Mar 25 2005, 01:27 PM--> (Pedro Alonso Lopez @ Mar 25 2005, 01:27 PM)
Dwarf [email protected] 25 2005, 12:16 AM
therefore I think thoughts?

-???

No, try harder. [/b]
It was part of Husserl's philosophy of the "transcendental ego" - something like the soul.

I searched google - obviously - i did not try babel fish and just searched "cogitatum" and got to link (http://www.mcu.ac.th/e-book/English/manual/sartre/01_3.html)
apparently it was "ego-cogito-cogitatum"? or "ego cogito cogitatum que cogitatum"? and cogito means action, not thought?

still don't know what it translates to.

"try harder"?
from glossary of Husserl's terms (http://www.filosoficas.unam.mx/~gth/dat-cd.htm)

Or: cogito
Esp: cogito [Ga]
Por: cogito [P]
Fte: 1
Or: cogitatum
Esp: cogitatum [Ga]
Por: cogitatum [P]
Fte: 1
... hahaha - no help at all.

"phenomenology"?

The aim of this abridged edition is to provide an accessible introduction for professional philosophers, students and general readers alike, to a work which, although recognised as the most important foundational text of the whole phenomenological movement and as a rich source of original ideas in the philosophy of logic and in semantics, has a not undeserved reputation as a difficult, dense, impenetrable and confusing text.

I'll need a much more succinct version... time is power

[edit]

is it the famous "I think therefore I am" one?

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Wow Im surprised the effort you went for it.

Well its the phenomenological version of I think therefore I am but since there is no I in phenomenology or disctinction between subject object it is basically

its 'Ego' -sorry added an r by mistake in first post which is the self

'cogito' which is the mind, conciousness which interacts with the world

and 'cogitatum' - the processes, content fo what the mind is experiences.

So it is a breakdown of the I think therefore I am to just I think in my conciousness and interact with the world.

Heres something from an essay I wrote on it that is relevant to this topic with regards phenomenology. By the way phen. would pretty much destroy all these notions most of the people have here about scepticism and the I and so on:

Characterised as an unprejudiced act of philosophizing, it aims to be free from the presuppositions that system building philosophies carry with them. It is thus not a system or a theory but a ‘mode’ of philosophizing looking to the role of intuition and its relation to the phenomena themselves as they appear to consciousness. Thus it aims to elucidate the objective world but in its relation to the subjective nature of consciousness, attempting to overcome the traditional separation philosophy has evoked between the objective and subjective. The hope is that there can be a reconciliation of both by recognising the importance of both in relation to one another in our understanding of the world.

[Canadian_Marxist!_]

I am but a figment of your immagination (Drug Enduced Hallucination)


Your tripping so hard you think you know named "Vandad Kardar" , you need to stop taking hard drugs , I died many many years ago


Cold war or even erleir possibly lenin's time! :ph34r:

[TC]

:D i'm only dead on the inside! :lol:


or, taken literally, anything you experiance demonstrates that you're not dead...a boring life is still a life.

[OleMarxco]

Yes, but is it an existance? Or does it.."qualify"? Do people with boring lives think, therefore they are? Or are they just dead flesh still kept "floating around"? You goddamn undead! :engles:

Pedro: Registrate goddamnit, you fly-by fuck :P

[Pawn Power]

not yet

[Mitch Flo]

Someone plays too much D&D tongue.gif
There is such a thing??:o

I think i'm alive... no way to prove that though.

[Spoonman]

Whether I truely exist or not can't be determined but in my mind I am very much alive and loving it so thats good enough for me.

[jake_crocker]

Am I living? I don't think I can argue my way out of that one! To live is to experience ... Commiebastard has been reading a bit to much Russell I think.. although that isn't a bad thing. Is living passive, or experiencing? I suppose you could reduce this argument into free will against determinism. I don't necessarily make decisions with free will ...

[apathy maybe]

Life is just a whim of a bunch of cells to be you for a little bit.

What is life? If you can't give a definition of life that includes all life then you cannot define un-life (or vis-versa).

[SpeCtrE]

I am still dead, I will live when I am working, and won't die through my work.

...I am to be immortal, soon.

[The Apathetic Atheist]

Originally posted by Apathy [email protected] 19 2005, 07:55 AM
Life is just a whim of a bunch of cells to be you for a little bit.

What is life? If you can't give a definition of life that includes all life then you cannot define un-life (or vis-versa).
I remember learning some universal truths that constitute a living thing in Science.

All living things require water.
All living things must die.

[S_Nylia]

Physically yes i am alive of course, but mentally.... quite simply no and every day i find something that kills me of mentally ever day, wether it be what is happening to the people of the world or the slow drowning and typical sameness of my life . Just look around yourself for a few mintues everyday , you will see people mindlessly wandering around getting on with there everyday routines that they are happy with because not to much thought has to go into to anything then. So yes iam dead like almost everybody else out there how feels stuck and useless in the every day world we have know. :angry:

[MetaZuton]

Enjoy life, and every activity in it.
Enjoy activity, and every aspect of it.
See the World for what it is, A thing that can be viewed from many angles.

How do we decide what angle we use? We generally don't. Someone else does for us. Or they tell us, we don't care WHAT you think, so long as you do x, y & z. Which is a messy process, as can be seen from the results of how people end up thinking.

Learning how to appreciate the World is a harsh lesson, sometimes the feelings of resentment, or self-loathing, brought about by prior inability to appreciate the World can be crushing.

But we have to learn, and look for everything that we can find. The open mind is essential.

But never be fooled into thinking you know what 'open mind' even means. You can only ever have a passing comprehension, one which can and should be changed.
It is easiest to get someone to do x, y and z when you ensure that whatever their thinking process, they feel guilt. Before they are actually free to decide for themselves, you tell them they have freedom ("And God Gave Us Free Will"). Then you tell them that though they have freedom, there is an absolute moral framework in the world, against which they are measured and should measure themselves. Guilt is a beautiful reinforcer of x, y and z.
Such people are capable of getting into surprisingly in depth discussions about the philosophy of freedom (in depth doesnt meaning they're going into the depth of actuality, just the depths of artificial theory), without ever having tasted freedom, whatever that may mean.

The potential trap of freedom exists for all words, all concepts, and we should never suppose when we engage in a process that we are actually succeeding at that process. Especially if our understanding of the process remains static, as only a process that includes self-referential change (or examination and comparison that leads to the rejection of particular changes) can maybe be succesful.

Academic Philosophers and the courses they run do NOT teach philosophy, they teach about the history of philosophy, and a variety of ideas that have been spawned by philosophy. But they do not teach how to understand philosophy, how to engage with it and the world. They do not teach philosophy itself.

Anyone and everyone can be a philosopher, and 'teach' philosophy. All it requires is a humble exchange and weighing of thought and understanding, ensuring that reference is made to the phenomenon.

[Sa'd al-Bari]

Death can occur to varying degrees. It is possible for one to have dead organs, or dead cells, but for the organism as a whole to continue functioning despite the death of some of its components. Since my organs continue to function properly, and I myself as an organism functions as a whole, I must deduce that I am alive.

Perhaps, however, neurologically I likely have a mostly dead brain. This is because the large majority of my neurons are not connected, and therefore I have much unused brain power that does not function. Therefore, you may consider my brain to be partially dead, unused matter.

Death, upon closer examination is a very relative term. But since the question asks “are you alive?” I must assume that it asks if I as an organism am alive, to which the answer is yes. Yet we all consist partially of dead cells, finger nails for example are composed of dead cells.

[apathy maybe]

Originally posted by The Apathetic Atheist+May 24 2005, 10:19 AM--> (The Apathetic Atheist @ May 24 2005, 10:19 AM)
Apathy [email protected] 19 2005, 07:55 AM
Life is just a whim of a bunch of cells to be you for a little bit.

What is life? If you can't give a definition of life that includes all life then you cannot define un-life (or vis-versa).
I remember learning some universal truths that constitute a living thing in Science.

All living things require water.
All living things must die. [/b]
Thus if an artificial intelligence was created it would not be alive? (Because it didn't require water?)

You haven't defined life, simply a charatoristic of some life.

Saying it must die simply creates a circlur arguement, what is death?

[Palmares]

I live the authentic life.

The life that is authetic to me.

And in essense, that is what being authentic is.

This authenticty gives me life, so then I cannot be dead.

How much more alive could I be though?

That, I shall see.

[apathy maybe]

You still haven't defined what life is! Until you give a definition of life or death, you can't claim to be either.

What is authenticity? How can you be more authentic if you can't define terms?

Please let us all go and hug the trees. And smoke some chocolate. And smash the state.

[codyvo]

Your heart pumps, you are alive.

I don't see why so many of us are coming up with long deep explanations, it isn't a complex matter are you dead or alive, if you answer than you are alive.

[apathy maybe]

What if I don't have a heart? What if I am an Artificial Intelligence? Am I alive then? Was I ever alive? What if I was never born? What if I don't exist? (I know you don't!)

[encephalon]

Life is a very difficult concept to define. I'd say, really, that there's no difference between that which is commonly called alive and dead save for a specific configuration and integration of particles. Once that configuration ends, the appearance of life ends.

I think a better question would be "are you conscious."

[Che NJ]

Of course we're conscious, I'm thinking about typing this right now. but about being alive or dead, if I was realyy dead my body wouldn't work and I would be dead. But unless you believe the mind has the ability to leave the brain after death, you are not dead.

[Free Spirit]

Originally posted by Major. [email protected] 5 2005, 02:06 AM
I really dont know.... i was out of it the night when i typed it in... and watching the doors moive like 5 times.... so forget about this post, it was a dumb question....
Actually after seeing The Doors movie 5 times it's not strange at all to be asking if you're dead
let me refresh your memory: :D
Do you know the warm progress under the stars?
Do you know we exist?
Have you forgotten the keys to the kingdom?
Have you been born yet & are you alive?
-Jim Morrison

The program of this evening is not new,
You've seen this entertainment through and through.
You've seen your birth, you life and death.
You might recall all the rest.
Did you have a good world when you died?
Enough to base a movie on?
- Jim Morrison

[Free Spirit]

So am I dead?
I'm reborn when every realisation comes to my mind and I’m mostly alive at specific moments when I know my mind is free and if not I'm not dead but dying and then I realise!

[quelliire]

I am most certainly dead then,.. unless i am listening to Sonic Youth, laying in the yard,.. looking at the blue sky dashed by white bubbles of clouds after having smoked some strong ass hydro... reality bites i would rather be lost in a dream forever

[danny android]

Originally posted by Major. [email protected] 10 2005, 02:29 AM
Are You Dead?

I was born dead

[Anarcho-Communist]

I have come close to death, hanging myself. I don't particulary enjoy life anyway

[Postteen]

When I was 12 I thought that life we live now is just a dream and death is when we wake up!

But no, I'm not dead, and none of us is, since all the chemical/physical processes happen in our body and around the world, and we are conscious about them.We have understood how life 'works' and we are living beings.Anyway, I prefer being materialistic...

[RedAnarchist]

We are aware of life, we are aware of death. We cannot avoid death, but we can avoid life. Life is temporary, death permanent.

If i am alive and aware of my life and others are aware of my life, is the tree that falls when noone is around aware that it makes a noise?

[codyvo]

Of course it makes a noise, no one hears it though, so how do I know it makes a noise, because I'm not a dumb fuck.

[Bannockburn]

I think therefore I am

That datum only suggest that there is mental existence – anything beyond of which mental existence is up for debate. For example, Taoism suggest that what we calling our “dreaming state” is as real as our “awaken state”, unlike the Western prioritization of the awaken state, and falsification of the dreaming state.

A simple empirical answer to this question could be this: Since nobody has ever experience phenomenon of death, we have no criteria to suggest we know what death is in order to make a distinction of alive-death – therefore it’s a rhetorical question with no real knowledge advancement.

[dragonoverlord]

Just yesterday i thought i was so i stood infront of the tv to get a reaction from my sister and she told me to move o ut of the way so i knew i wasnt but my sister makes me feel i am constantly.
Once i thought i was invisible because my sister wfas ignoring me so i picked up a book that was beside her and i started laughing and walked away but before i did she told me to give back the book.

[QUOTE]But I'm talking about are YOU doing as you want... are you making decision on your own... are you alive?... in a since that are you mentally alive, are you dead?

You meant that way so i see i will explain my thoughts on this. Recently ive done alot of thinking thought about the big questions and now i see things from a new perspective awhile ago I thought before i asked these questions and thought about them i t hought i was nothing before asking these questions. When i walk outside and see people having fun even my friends i see them having fun and not asking questions or thinking just having fun i think they are fools and they have not grasped existence as i have.

So my conclusion is that with my thought on this questions and there lack of it i conclude mentally they are dead and i am alive.

[Gnosis]

I could say I am "dead", but in relation to what?
And what is "dead" anyway?
I cannot be certain of anything.
And in that I find the greatest freedom.
I cannot be certain of anything but my own uncertainty.
Great opportunity for change and experience.
Infinite limitation is freedom.

But what does it MEAN?

It does not mean anything, and in that it means everything.

I could say I am "alive", but in relation to what?
What is "life" if there is no other to compare to?

That is the purpose of death.
Not to destroy "life", but to make it possible by giving it something to exist in relation to.
And that is itself.

Death is reletive, life is reletive, everything is reletive as everything is in motion.
Without motion, nothing is possible, but if nothing is possible than everything is possible and to be one must move.
Time and space.
Movement in relation to time and space.
And that is energy and matter in relation to the speed of, lets say, light, which is constant at every level.

I don't know anything, and so being I know everything.

Consciousness is everything.

[TC]

You can't answer any "philosophical" question with an appeal to universial skepticism (i.e. 'What if none of this is real?' type replies) because such lines of questioning are not always relevant. For instance if you're discussing the nature of metaphysics and reality on the broadest most abstract level, then maybe skepticism like that is relevant because it applies to the topic (that is, the nature of reality) but if the topic is anything else then issues like your own existance are not at question...so that line of inquiry is irrelevant.

So the answer to "am i dead" is pretty simple: no (to be dead is to have a set of properties that anyone talking about it obviously doesn't have). Trying to be sophisticated and making it more complicated is just psudo-pop-philosophical b.s....gnosis :-p

[Gnosis]

What are the properties of one who is "dead"?

I am not certain.

In being uncertain, I do not know for sure whether or not any of the qualities of death apply to me.
I may very well be "dead", I am not sure.


You can't answer any "philosophical" question with an appeal to universial skepticism (i.e. 'What if none of this is real?' type replies) because such lines of questioning are not always relevant.

Yes I can.
Relevence and meaning are a matter of opinion.
What I see as perfectly relevent you may not, but who is more correct?


For instance if you're discussing the nature of metaphysics and reality on the broadest most abstract level, then maybe skepticism like that is relevant because it applies to the topic (that is, the nature of reality) but if the topic is anything else then issues like your own existance are not at question...so that line of inquiry is irrelevant.

When you say something is irrelevent, you automatically limit yourself to what, in your opinion, is relevent.
Remember, you can't have one without the other, relevence and irrelevence exist in relation to each other only.

I am free to be as broad and abstract as I please.
I am limited to being as broad and abstract as I please.

If you think it is irrelevent, then it is and you should not waste your time on it.
If something I have said seems irrelevent to you, then it is not for you and you should move on to what is.



So the answer to "am i dead" is pretty simple: no (to be dead is to have a set of properties that anyone talking about it obviously doesn't have). Trying to be sophisticated and making it more complicated is just psudo-pop-philosophical b.s....gnosis :-p

What are the properties of that which is "dead"?
What does "dead" mean?
Is it something you have, something you are, or someplace you be?
If the answer is so obvious, then why has the question been asked in the first place?
Is it not a matter of opinion?
Is it wrong to say that death is reletive to life and that one may not exist without the other?
I observe what I call life existing with and in relation to what I call death, is it foolish of me to assume that they do not exist otherwise?

Oh great seer of truths, the mysterious Tragic Clown, please share with me your infinite knowledge so that I may dream of some day being as fruitful and enlightened as you.
I know I am unsophisticated, I know I am false, I am fake, I am weak.
I am not worthy, but I beg you, share with me your secrets, that knowledge of that which is so obvious that an ordinary fool such as myself cannot see it staring directly into her eyes as it sits on the tip of her nose.
One thousand apologies for being so irrelevent, I hope I have not offended thee beyond the point of forgiveness.

[Bannockburn]

Assuming there is such thing as death. Nobody has experienced death, so nobody can tell you what death is like, or what it is. Have you ever met any unhappy dead people? Okay, side note: Since every moment of every second cells are being regenerated, and old ones dying off, as a continual process you are currently now both alive and dead. If you are both alive and dead, then you are neither alive, nor dead. Therefore, what are you? You are not dead, you are not alive.

[Gnosis]

There is being.
There is no not-being, for that is a form of being as well.
Non-existence does not exist.
Existence is.
Non-existence is not.
Do I exist?
Yes.
I can't not exist.
There was no begining, there will be no end.
And this is possible because change is possible.
Death is not the begining of non-existence.
Death is change.
Death is life as life is death.
To be alive is to be dying, and to be dead is to be alive.
The nature of the universe is constant transformation, and that is the only reason why it is possible.
Infinite limitation is the ultimate freedom.
I can be not me, but I cannot not be.
Nothing is ever created or destroyed.
There is but transformation.
My body may disintegrate, but it is not destroyed.

Now here is the question: Consciousness, where does it go?
There is no place but here, it stays here.
There is a dimension of reality that the shock of being "born" causes us to forget.
That is intentional.
Not everyone forgets, though.

It is consciousness.
Consciousness is the goel of the universe.
The universe is infinite transformation so that it may be consciousness.
There is a point, and it is consciousness.
Consciousness is an energy which is created by the turning of the wheels of the universe.
This solar system is a wheel.
This is no coincidence.
The sun with the earth and the water created our bodies.
We are the sun the water and the earth and the air.
We created ourselves.
The universe is our consciousness.

I don't know any further than that.
I am blocked.

[viva le revolution]

The post before this one is total bullshit.

[drain.you]

Hmm....
How can we define life and death?
Life is what you are experiencing now.
Death is the absense of life.

We don't know what death is though, we don't know what it feels like. And perhaps I am not feeling what you classify as life, therefore I could be dead in relation to what you believe life is.

Perhaps life is unqiue to each person. If so, then is death unique to every person? It is easy to argue that the experiences in our lives will all be different (even if just minor things) and therefore life is unqiue to each individual person.

[Gnosis]

The post before this one is total bullshit.

As if this is any more insightful than rambling foolishness.

I am trying to express what I see and feel and think.
Thank you for disagreeing with me, but can't you come up with anything more than the word "bullshit" to express your feeling toward my work?
How am I supposed to better myself if the only opposition is so unevolved?
I can see myself in relation to you, but your critisism leaves me wanting to know Why? and what about it is such "bullshit"?
If you are going to have an opinion, it is easier to take you seriously if you aren't so superficial in your response.
Until you give more than just a one word recognition of my negetive existence, I am forced to disregard your phrase and your image as immature, superficial, and underdeveloped. I may also make the assumption that you watch a lot of TV and drink coca cola.

[slim]

Death is normally associated with pain and suffering in many cultures. On this assumption it makes me ponder... when i die will i still feel the pain upon which i suffered death or will it leave me in peace? Perhaps this is where the view of heaven and hell comes from. Hell i imagine is still being in your body after death and feeling the torment of life in its absence. Heaven i assume is leaving your phsical form and going somewhere where all the other souls are. I dont know where this is and can only dream of such a place.

I worry about my death when i think about it. I see it as closing in on me. I have accepted the fact that one day the life i lead will not be. I also know as a fact i will not die naturally. Once again, the weight of knowing this fate is heavy on my shoulders but i accept it with enthusiasm and know its for the best. I fear the unknown. I can sense those who are dead but cannot see them. I can feel them and i fear joining them as i have not seen it before.

Oh well.

Do chara,

Slim.

[viva le revolution]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2005, 12:40 PM


As if this is any more insightful than rambling foolishness.

I am trying to express what I see and feel and think.
Thank you for disagreeing with me, but can't you come up with anything more than the word "bullshit" to express your feeling toward my work?
How am I supposed to better myself if the only opposition is so unevolved?
I can see myself in relation to you, but your critisism leaves me wanting to know Why? and what about it is such "bullshit"?
If you are going to have an opinion, it is easier to take you seriously if you aren't so superficial in your response.
Until you give more than just a one word recognition of my negetive existence, I am forced to disregard your phrase and your image as immature, superficial, and underdeveloped. I may also make the assumption that you watch a lot of TV and drink coca cola.
Ok i apologise for my comment, but your ranblings are incoherent , full of contradictions in itself, just a loose ammelioration of words and incoherent phrases fashioned for merely banal intellectual consistency, meant to attract the lowest common denominator of intellectual thought.
There is no such thing as negative existence. Life is an opportunity, an opportunity for the betterment for those around you. The realization that life has a purpose is found out in the course of it. For example, in the context of marxism and class struggle, those who understand the content of marxism have a purpose in life to raise awareness and for agitation of the working class. The realization that life is meaningless is defeat in itself. Therefore expressing only incoherent musings is immaterial to the development of yourself and those around you, hence my negative reaction.
The development of the human psyche takes place in the material, hence musing about the spiritual is just a waste of time and effort. The sooner acceptance of this sinks in, the sooner the material world is realized, the sooner life takes on a purpose. Even death cannot defeat a life that has lived to realize it's purpose.

[John Dory]

? ;)

[Gnosis]

The realization that life is meaningless is defeat in itself.

I disagree. I think that the realization that life is ultimately meaningless is the greatest freedom one my aquire during his or her time as life.
The fact that there is no constant meaning to life means that we may prescribe to it any meaning we see fit, there is no meaning only if you never give meaning to it.
So in that meaninglessness is not defeat, it is victory.

I do contradict myself because I understand that a concept may not exist without its equal opposite.
The only reason anything exists is because it has an opposite to exist in relation to which gives it its form.
If their was nothing to compare to, nothing would exist.


The development of the human psyche takes place in the material, hence musing about the spiritual is just a waste of time and effort.

Spirituality is material reality.
Or, rather, an interpretation of material reality.
Spirituality is one of the infinite meanings which may be applied to material reality.
It does not exist without material reality, and from my perspective it is a valuable tool for furthering the mind.
It is a door to walk through, but not a room to stand in.
There are no rooms, only doors.

There is no defeat. Death is not a defeat. There is no destruction, no creation, only transformation.
Death is change.

[viva le revolution]

Again you are contradicting yourself in your posts with a meaningless post full of new-age mumbo jumbo which has no relation to reality, instead stands on the flimsiest of grounds, idealism.
Such theories and thoughts have been proven by history to be completely useless, either in determinig the course of action of an individual let alone a movement or nation. Idealism is a failed concept and pursunig a path of self-contradictions will lead absolutely nowhere, because these thoughts will remain just that, thoughts.

[pandora]

Our purpose is in the words of MLK to make the life of one other not so grim, if we can help someone in our and their stuggles with a word, then our living is not in vain.

Praxis of action and reflective practice is action that soothes wounds, action without reflection creates wounds, and theory without action does nothing.

As far as the nature of objects there is an objects conventional nature, it's subtle nature-- mostly winds or directional energy, as related to in spirituality,especially Native American, the spirit of things, and then their ultimate nature, which is mostly empty space, more addressed in physics and molecular biology, as well as Tibetan Buddhism--which is why a lot of physics professors are speaking with high level lamas who have realized high imperical thought indirectly--or directly depending on how you relate. This level is also related to in post-modernism, so this is where Marxist ideology and these views cross. Particularly in relation to the work of Paulo Freire and "place-based awareness" the idea that what the proleteriat experiences is different than the world an oppressor experiences, and that they actually experience and exist in different realities and their is a disconnect between the haves and have nots.

Bottom line is to have awareness of other level, or ultimate level of things to keep your head straight and keep from getting overwhelmed by the day to day crap, while working on the conventional level.

Straight cynicism is not helpful to a generative praxis.

[Gnosis]

I realize that I contradict myself.
I do not try to not contradict myself.
One concept may not have meaning without its reletive opposition.
Contradiction is pure concept.

Meaninglessness is meaning and meaning depends on the point of view of the one observing the experience to be or not to be given meaning to.
And so if you say that my words have no meaning, then you are correct.
However, it is no less correct to say that they do have meaning.


Idealism is a failed concept and pursunig a path of self-contradictions will lead absolutely nowhere, because these thoughts will remain just that, thoughts.

You say nowhere, I say Now Here.

You know what, thinking about things isnt all that bad. I think that if more people were to sit around and think more often we all might live healthier lives than those who work constantly or watch TV rather than sit in silence.
The world might be a better place if more people would sometimes simply not do anything except for think.


new-age mumbo jumbo which has no relation to reality

I disagree.
New age mubo jumbo exists in relation to "reality".
The only reason why one might think it does not is because one has not experienced this relationship.

Besides, what you might experience as reality might be the opposite of what I might experience as reality.
That being so, which is more "real"?
Obviously that answer depends on the point of view of he who does the answering.


Such theories and thoughts have been proven by history to be completely useless

I disagree.
I do not think history has ever proven anything.
I do not think experience ever proves anything about anything.
I do not think there is anything to be proven, and if their was we have no way of going about proving it.

I observe you seriously underestimating the power of the thought.