Here is an answer… to the riddle – “If you stop looking, you will eventually settle on an answer – one that you are willing to accept is your FINAL answer†. Truth is, that your final answer will depend upon just how you want to understand and define “realityâ€.
Truth may not be relative, but – perspective sure is! And perspective drives awareness. And awareness leads to the rise of possibilities. And possibilities get sorted out and ranked by some understanding of likelihood. And likelihood is governed by the laws of the universe… and then we conduct experiments. And then we scratch our heads and realize one big thing…
We do not understand the laws of the universe. (See Quantum Physics if you doubt this statement.)
So,– the only answers to your question are relative. Relative to what?
I propose that the answers are relative to how you comprehend a puppet show. More on that, later.
First, let’s look at what compels us to even have answers.
Most people start to grab onto their FINAL answers by the age of 50-60. I mean the kind of answers that a person would not be ashamed of taking to his /her grave. I mean…. Who wants to admit to being MORE confused at age 55 than we were at age 20? ïŠ
But, in reality, most of us start the process of thinking that given explanations are “un-satisfactoryâ€â€¦. by the age of 6-7. We begin to dismantle the apparatus that allows us to be satisfied with an answer that fine when we were 4 or 5. This is the end of the idea that any temporary answer is fine. From then on, skepticism is the order of the day. Innocence has run its course. (I remember one kid that I went to school with, his parents were poor… so instead of making their kid think that he was a bad kid (because he would not be getting any presents), and still not wanting to tell him their FINAL answer… they told him that Santa was dead. This was, of course, a temporary answer.)
Early answers are designed to be outgrown. They can never be final answers… or can they?
Another Example: Think of watching a puppet show with your own child at the age of 4. (Notice their look of AWE during the performance!!)
Then, repeat the process with them at the age of 8.
Where did the AWE go?? You most likely heard something like “That was completely silly!!â€
But let’s think about it… There was no willful deception. I mean the strings were out there for everyone to see! This is not like the Santa deal where it is the parents’ fault that they created a credibility problem with the kids.
The art of puppetry is considered to be of a high caliber if the actions of the puppets weave an entertaining diversion from “true reality†and create a “temporary realityâ€. Little kids in the audience don’t care about an adult’s definition of reality. They don’t need it. I mean, why mess up your 4 year old’s enjoyment by trying to explain to them “what is REALLY going onâ€.
Everyone in the audience, except probably the youngest of children, knows the performance is “fauxâ€. Although kids and parents alike might be intrigued if the backdrop and façade were to fall down during the show – exposing the REALITY of the show – I would think that most watchers do NOT want to meet the puppeteers until after the show.
Kids LIKE watching toys being animated, as if they were alive! (Why do you think that Toy Story was so popular?) Is the story reality? Don’t ask your child!! Let your 4 year old figure it out on his or her own – you can even help them if they have questions… but DANG – don’t volunteer your understanding of reality and ruin a perfectly good show just because you want to show-off how smart you are!!
But the reality that the puppets ARE moving should never be used as a foil to suggest to the kids that the characters are ACTUALLY moving and talking. That should constitute lying!! Right???
... not necessarily. Here is where you have to be more careful. The question is who or what is moving them and who or what is causing the speaking.
The little kids will believe, and some of the older kids WANT to believe (at least a little bit) that it is real – because that makes the faux-reality more entertaining. So the child creates the idea in his/her own mind that “life†is embodied in those creatures. The child imagines. One with more belief than the other.
When this happens, the child becomes a co-creator (so as to speak) of the entertainment – completing with his/her own mind what the puppeteer is trying to achieve. That is the reality of the moment.
The audience creates the “magicâ€, while the puppeteer creates the forms/objects that hold it. To say that the child’s imagination is insignificant or plays no role, is to deny the AWE!! on the face of your own child.
Passing question, as a parent do you think that is REAL amazement and joy on your child’s face?
1. God is NOT an object… if we, the audience, believe that the dangling manifestations we see (the alive stuff in this world) on life’s stage are truly independently alive, and we believe (I mean we really do no know, OK?) that they came from nothing, and that they are going nowhere – then God can not be an object because… first and foremost, He is NOT on stage.
(Sounds like childish denial at work, or a kid who has had his/her imagination ripped out by the roots by someone who told them the equivalent that Santa was dead.).
2. To others… God IS a puppeteer type “object†if they think that the alive things in this world are in fact alive and have a purpose and are under His puppet control. In short, they THINK they see strings going to everything!! And they think that God is holdoing all the strings!
3. Finally, to others, God is NOT an object or a puppeteer if they think that God simply is… the energy comprising all manifestations – on stage and behind stage and in the audience. Nothing is independent of him.
So, the answers that are possible have nothing to do with a single perspective about reality… Because, there isn’t one.
So my answer to Todd’s question, “Depends upon your perception of reality and how you think everything works.â€
Like the movie “Toy Story†– when Buzz Lightyear is confronted with the “truth†from the lips of the more well adjusted Woody… that Buzz is just “…A TOY!!†– Perception and awareness change the reality we all see.
(By the way, the thing that brings joy and life to Toy Story is NOT when Buzz finally gets a dose of reality… it is the fact that the WHOLE movie is based upon the conjecture and premise that toys ARE alive – every time a REAL person is not looking. And they only broke the rule, once… for evil Syd who used his imagination to steal, kill and destroy).
People who give up on imagination… are usually a sad, sourful group. I think some people are bummed out when they figure out that their FINAL answers are no good, anyway. They are just temporary.
Temporary answers are likely all that we have in this our current “realityâ€. Life teaches us this. The whole body of human knowledge teaches us this. Flat earth…? Only a FINAL answer for a while.
Are we, as aging adults, to bury our heads in the sand and suggest that there is nothing else to know? "Everything that can be invented has been invented."
Charles H. Duell, U.S. Commissioner of Patents, in 1899
This is silly. Just look at most old people. Are they full of joy?
No. Then where did the joy go? Sore joints? Don’t think so.
Is the fact that they have given their “final answer†and now actually have a reason NOT to progress, and have a vested interest NOT to see things in a new light – is this hindering the production of AWE and Joy??
Is the stifling creative possibility to be enshrined as the REAL product of old age? Is such a lack of joy inevitable for us all who are Too Gray Now?
HELL NO!!! ïŠ
If we see things as being new – if we look for new ways to understand things, are we chasing rainbows?... or are we in fact practicing the reality that our perspective affords us?
Hasn’t life taught us that – our answers are likely only good enough to move us along in the process of learning – kind of like manna – it rots if you hold onto it too long?
Can we not appreciate the child’s point of view? Must we ruin their joy by forcing them to see life through adult eyes before they are ready to find their next temporary reality? Who would do such a thing?
I think that life’s prize of joy often goes to the child (not because it must, but because aging folks often do not engage with life in a way that lets them have a temporary reality).
Why? Are the early answers in life supposed to hold us prisoner? Can we never change?
Do I, as an old guy… want to avoid the shame and the embarrassing explanation of how a cult deceived me into spending years wrapped up in someone else’s reality – which is NO LONGER my reality?
I do not think that is something to be ashamed of… I think anyone who changes should be congratulated. At least – you might finally win life’s prize of joy - AGAIN!!!
this all brings up thoughts of, is imagination real, is love real, are there any that are still searching out the unknown God.
there is none righteous as it is written. and speaking of it is written, what really was written, how who why, the ears to hear it or closed off to perspective as TGN put it which is real.
what is Hope is it what we were taught or can it be seen (perspective) with new eyes, heard with new ears....and even grow into something real, not just a could be, or a should be.
our personal perspective of God and Hope...
can it change? Is there Hope, Love, Faith
is God an object?
are we an object?
are Hope, Love, Faith
an object?
are we stuck or trapped into tricking our minds into something that may or may not be? Or is there something really there that is real and will grow and those dark sayings of old will lighten the place up, the mind...
i was told not to expect too much....
from people....seems the expectation is real
and it's a shame cause John and others writes to us
as children, with dreams, imagination and hope
and love which are real now
it's these things that will die and be born again more then once...
are we stuck or trapped into tricking our minds into something that may or may not be? Or is there something really there that is real and will grow and those dark sayings of old will lighten the place up, the mind...
CM - that is a good quandry you have identified!!
(Although it sort of looks like I killed the thread – maybe you and I can talk about this :)--> )
First thing that stands out to me is the idea of trickery.
By what standard are we to determine if something is, in fact, “real� (As if a “standard†has the ability to protect us from everything we are by nature, - easily deceived by trickery.)
Nonetheless, mankind seems bent upon “direct observation†of a thing via some device as being the most SURE and required of scientific tools. We think a standard insulates us from ourselves... frankly, I think that is silly.
I think we are easily tricked and deceived. A simple magician’s show can leave most of us baffled for years! Rather than trying to pretend that we KNOW – we ought to be more genuine and honest. But we don’t do that well (mankind doesn’t “do†genuine – it does not seem to come to us “naturallyâ€). What mankind seems to do very well is argue our point of perception. We do personal perception statements VERY well…
Yet it takes a tremendous amount of work to try and prove a perception. So, we require proofs. Proofs are required before we confer our sacred judgment and honor upon a thing by calling it true and real. Unconcealed. In the open.
CM, seems like some people invent a “reality†where the only things that are allowed to exist as a MEMBER of that REALITY are those things that will predictably show up… Yes, those objects which will come out into the open and react in a predictable way (like a dancing bear) to stimuli which they introduce.
This select club has a limited membership, as you can imagine. They call themselves skeptics, but – I think they put too much faith in the ability of the human mind to “think clearly†and be “objectiveâ€. Personally, I think these are two of humanities weakest traits. And simply bolting on a pair of binoculars or squinting through an electron microscope does little to alleviate the inherent weakness of man’s ability to PERCEIVE reality. (Shoot, even the electron microscope has simply enabled us to look deeply enough into the atom to say… “Where did it go? It was there just a second ago? It disappeared!!†Just like a magician’s trick! Man’s inability to observe is STILL perplexing him.)
So when are people gonna smell the coffee? Quantum physics has given us at least one fantastic insight… and that is…. we don’t know squat.
Spirit has a physics. It is just a different physics than we have embraced at this time.
Electrons have an explanation of where they go when they disappear, too. -->
Stuff that goes on “behind the curtain†can go a long way to explaining and informing us.
But, if people say that there is NOTHING behind the curtain because we can not measure it, I fear we loose all hope of knowing “realityâ€.
…. And until that day comes along (meaning that “knowing†will no longer be limited to fleshly apparatuses of perception …) skeptics will remain…
…but I prefer to be numbered with those who are comfortable leaving the safety and security (or prison if you prefer) of the realm of tidy answers…
As a matter of fact… anyone can leave this dead-end flatland, today!
As you said, CM: “Or is there something really there that is real and will grow and those dark sayings of old will lighten the place up, the mind...â€
If a person can live with a high degree of uncertainty, then I am CERTAIN of at least one thing...
that person can grow in wonder and awe at the beauty we have that surrounds us!
If certainty and “reality†is a requirement for people in order that they will act... it should be known that at the end of the road is a dead-end sign.
A “Relative†type of experience in life acts like a new set of batteries in a flash light. The light won’t last forever, but – it will give you some light so you can get up and walk... and explore...
Or we can just sit in the dark - without a light, waiting for reality and certainty to find us…
the trickery is where it gets interesting (depending on the one in the wheel house) as opposed to what we have decided upon or forced ourselves to think is a stop sign and some sort of trick pulled on ourselves
and i think that maybe these two have to come to an agreement somewhere along the way in order to "feel" real....what may be or what may not be is depending upon taking the foot off the brake and hitting the gas
My oldest when he was 1 year old couldn't understand why the animals would not talk to him. The birds and the squirrels were there and living as he was. He could talk but they would not. Dissappointment was real. He tryed his best talking to them but they would not speak back to him and he couldn't understand why.
And as he grew older and understood, an even greater understanding came to pass. That there is something a bit more special about people then animals. Which gave that real sense and feeling of wonderment and more imagination and greater possibilities...
I'm glad you grabbed onto that low fruit. Most people think that expressions are trite - I find them, often, VERY interesting.
I think you did an excellent job, pointing out the implications of the trite statement.
The impact of how a person looks at (perspective) of the self - is amazingly powerful.
Just went to see the Phantom of the Opera at the theater. The Phantom's image of his "self" was a mirror of his contorted visage. His view of his self led to destruction of his own making.
I found learning in this character. Learning about the impact of isolation and shame on a self.
Please allow me to go a bit further - If a creator is an object - then a destroyer is an object, too. (Kind of like saying if a quarter is a coin, than the heads side of it is every bit as much the “coin†as the tails side.)
A destroyer seems to sense himself as an object and sees his self as - wounded and detached (i.e. sees his "self" as cut off from intimacy with others BUT at the same time deeply connected to those things which isolate and wound him).
This seems to generate the energy and motive and means that an alienated self needs to accomplish destruction.
Geee... and we all know that we are urged by those “who are supposed to know†– that a healthy self image is one which is independent.
News flash… independence is only one small step away from isolation. And isolation does wound a self. And a wounded self becomes capable of amazing destruction.
Bottom line: the creative self does not flourish in the awareness of a subject/object relationship – but the destructive mechanisms require at least one “self†to BE the object and at least one OTHER “self†to BE the subject.
Welcome… to the Phantom of the Opera – we are living it. This play, for many people, is their “realityâ€.
you are knockin' on some unified theory doors. I always liked that sound of the knuckles on that approach to truth.
Roy,
Glad you decided to play. :)-->
And just for the record, I don't know who will pass the "test", either.
I do think that those who believe they got truth figured out, will likely be dealt a "do-over" sometime - just so they can come up with a different answer.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
19
25
29
6
Popular Days
Sep 7
20
Sep 20
10
Sep 9
8
Sep 17
6
Top Posters In This Topic
sirguessalot 19 posts
CM 25 posts
Too Gray Now 29 posts
irisheyes 6 posts
Popular Days
Sep 7 2005
20 posts
Sep 20 2005
10 posts
Sep 9 2005
8 posts
Sep 17 2005
6 posts
Too Gray Now
Here goes...
Is God an object?
Here is an answer… to the riddle – “If you stop looking, you will eventually settle on an answer – one that you are willing to accept is your FINAL answer†. Truth is, that your final answer will depend upon just how you want to understand and define “realityâ€.
Truth may not be relative, but – perspective sure is! And perspective drives awareness. And awareness leads to the rise of possibilities. And possibilities get sorted out and ranked by some understanding of likelihood. And likelihood is governed by the laws of the universe… and then we conduct experiments. And then we scratch our heads and realize one big thing…
We do not understand the laws of the universe. (See Quantum Physics if you doubt this statement.)
So,– the only answers to your question are relative. Relative to what?
I propose that the answers are relative to how you comprehend a puppet show. More on that, later.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Too Gray Now
...IS Santa Dead?
First, let’s look at what compels us to even have answers.
Most people start to grab onto their FINAL answers by the age of 50-60. I mean the kind of answers that a person would not be ashamed of taking to his /her grave. I mean…. Who wants to admit to being MORE confused at age 55 than we were at age 20? ïŠ
But, in reality, most of us start the process of thinking that given explanations are “un-satisfactoryâ€â€¦. by the age of 6-7. We begin to dismantle the apparatus that allows us to be satisfied with an answer that fine when we were 4 or 5. This is the end of the idea that any temporary answer is fine. From then on, skepticism is the order of the day. Innocence has run its course. (I remember one kid that I went to school with, his parents were poor… so instead of making their kid think that he was a bad kid (because he would not be getting any presents), and still not wanting to tell him their FINAL answer… they told him that Santa was dead. This was, of course, a temporary answer.)
Early answers are designed to be outgrown. They can never be final answers… or can they?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Too Gray Now
Puppet Show
Another Example: Think of watching a puppet show with your own child at the age of 4. (Notice their look of AWE during the performance!!)
Then, repeat the process with them at the age of 8.
Where did the AWE go?? You most likely heard something like “That was completely silly!!â€
But let’s think about it… There was no willful deception. I mean the strings were out there for everyone to see! This is not like the Santa deal where it is the parents’ fault that they created a credibility problem with the kids.
The art of puppetry is considered to be of a high caliber if the actions of the puppets weave an entertaining diversion from “true reality†and create a “temporary realityâ€. Little kids in the audience don’t care about an adult’s definition of reality. They don’t need it. I mean, why mess up your 4 year old’s enjoyment by trying to explain to them “what is REALLY going onâ€.
Everyone in the audience, except probably the youngest of children, knows the performance is “fauxâ€. Although kids and parents alike might be intrigued if the backdrop and façade were to fall down during the show – exposing the REALITY of the show – I would think that most watchers do NOT want to meet the puppeteers until after the show.
Kids LIKE watching toys being animated, as if they were alive! (Why do you think that Toy Story was so popular?) Is the story reality? Don’t ask your child!! Let your 4 year old figure it out on his or her own – you can even help them if they have questions… but DANG – don’t volunteer your understanding of reality and ruin a perfectly good show just because you want to show-off how smart you are!!
But the reality that the puppets ARE moving should never be used as a foil to suggest to the kids that the characters are ACTUALLY moving and talking. That should constitute lying!! Right???
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Too Gray Now
(continued...)
... not necessarily. Here is where you have to be more careful. The question is who or what is moving them and who or what is causing the speaking.
The little kids will believe, and some of the older kids WANT to believe (at least a little bit) that it is real – because that makes the faux-reality more entertaining. So the child creates the idea in his/her own mind that “life†is embodied in those creatures. The child imagines. One with more belief than the other.
When this happens, the child becomes a co-creator (so as to speak) of the entertainment – completing with his/her own mind what the puppeteer is trying to achieve. That is the reality of the moment.
The audience creates the “magicâ€, while the puppeteer creates the forms/objects that hold it. To say that the child’s imagination is insignificant or plays no role, is to deny the AWE!! on the face of your own child.
Passing question, as a parent do you think that is REAL amazement and joy on your child’s face?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Too Gray Now
(So, what is your Point TGN)
Explaining the parable:
1. God is NOT an object… if we, the audience, believe that the dangling manifestations we see (the alive stuff in this world) on life’s stage are truly independently alive, and we believe (I mean we really do no know, OK?) that they came from nothing, and that they are going nowhere – then God can not be an object because… first and foremost, He is NOT on stage.
(Sounds like childish denial at work, or a kid who has had his/her imagination ripped out by the roots by someone who told them the equivalent that Santa was dead.).
2. To others… God IS a puppeteer type “object†if they think that the alive things in this world are in fact alive and have a purpose and are under His puppet control. In short, they THINK they see strings going to everything!! And they think that God is holdoing all the strings!
3. Finally, to others, God is NOT an object or a puppeteer if they think that God simply is… the energy comprising all manifestations – on stage and behind stage and in the audience. Nothing is independent of him.
So, the answers that are possible have nothing to do with a single perspective about reality… Because, there isn’t one.
So my answer to Todd’s question, “Depends upon your perception of reality and how you think everything works.â€
Like the movie “Toy Story†– when Buzz Lightyear is confronted with the “truth†from the lips of the more well adjusted Woody… that Buzz is just “…A TOY!!†– Perception and awareness change the reality we all see.
(By the way, the thing that brings joy and life to Toy Story is NOT when Buzz finally gets a dose of reality… it is the fact that the WHOLE movie is based upon the conjecture and premise that toys ARE alive – every time a REAL person is not looking. And they only broke the rule, once… for evil Syd who used his imagination to steal, kill and destroy).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Too Gray Now
(Geee... will this ever END??))
>
People who give up on imagination… are usually a sad, sourful group. I think some people are bummed out when they figure out that their FINAL answers are no good, anyway. They are just temporary.
Temporary answers are likely all that we have in this our current “realityâ€. Life teaches us this. The whole body of human knowledge teaches us this. Flat earth…? Only a FINAL answer for a while.
Are we, as aging adults, to bury our heads in the sand and suggest that there is nothing else to know? "Everything that can be invented has been invented."
Charles H. Duell, U.S. Commissioner of Patents, in 1899
This is silly. Just look at most old people. Are they full of joy?
No. Then where did the joy go? Sore joints? Don’t think so.
Is the fact that they have given their “final answer†and now actually have a reason NOT to progress, and have a vested interest NOT to see things in a new light – is this hindering the production of AWE and Joy??
Is the stifling creative possibility to be enshrined as the REAL product of old age? Is such a lack of joy inevitable for us all who are Too Gray Now?
HELL NO!!! ïŠ
If we see things as being new – if we look for new ways to understand things, are we chasing rainbows?... or are we in fact practicing the reality that our perspective affords us?
Hasn’t life taught us that – our answers are likely only good enough to move us along in the process of learning – kind of like manna – it rots if you hold onto it too long?
Can we not appreciate the child’s point of view? Must we ruin their joy by forcing them to see life through adult eyes before they are ready to find their next temporary reality? Who would do such a thing?
I think that life’s prize of joy often goes to the child (not because it must, but because aging folks often do not engage with life in a way that lets them have a temporary reality).
Why? Are the early answers in life supposed to hold us prisoner? Can we never change?
Do I, as an old guy… want to avoid the shame and the embarrassing explanation of how a cult deceived me into spending years wrapped up in someone else’s reality – which is NO LONGER my reality?
I do not think that is something to be ashamed of… I think anyone who changes should be congratulated. At least – you might finally win life’s prize of joy - AGAIN!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
TGN firenup....smokin man....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
this all brings up thoughts of, is imagination real, is love real, are there any that are still searching out the unknown God.
there is none righteous as it is written. and speaking of it is written, what really was written, how who why, the ears to hear it or closed off to perspective as TGN put it which is real.
what is Hope is it what we were taught or can it be seen (perspective) with new eyes, heard with new ears....and even grow into something real, not just a could be, or a should be.
our personal perspective of God and Hope...
can it change? Is there Hope, Love, Faith
is God an object?
are we an object?
are Hope, Love, Faith
an object?
are we stuck or trapped into tricking our minds into something that may or may not be? Or is there something really there that is real and will grow and those dark sayings of old will lighten the place up, the mind...
i was told not to expect too much....
from people....seems the expectation is real
and it's a shame cause John and others writes to us
as children, with dreams, imagination and hope
and love which are real now
it's these things that will die and be born again more then once...
love always
clay
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Too Gray Now
CM - that is a good quandry you have identified!!
(Although it sort of looks like I killed the thread – maybe you and I can talk about this
:)--> )
First thing that stands out to me is the idea of trickery.
By what standard are we to determine if something is, in fact, “real� (As if a “standard†has the ability to protect us from everything we are by nature, - easily deceived by trickery.)
Nonetheless, mankind seems bent upon “direct observation†of a thing via some device as being the most SURE and required of scientific tools. We think a standard insulates us from ourselves... frankly, I think that is silly.
I think we are easily tricked and deceived. A simple magician’s show can leave most of us baffled for years! Rather than trying to pretend that we KNOW – we ought to be more genuine and honest. But we don’t do that well (mankind doesn’t “do†genuine – it does not seem to come to us “naturallyâ€). What mankind seems to do very well is argue our point of perception. We do personal perception statements VERY well…
Yet it takes a tremendous amount of work to try and prove a perception. So, we require proofs. Proofs are required before we confer our sacred judgment and honor upon a thing by calling it true and real. Unconcealed. In the open.
CM, seems like some people invent a “reality†where the only things that are allowed to exist as a MEMBER of that REALITY are those things that will predictably show up… Yes, those objects which will come out into the open and react in a predictable way (like a dancing bear) to stimuli which they introduce.
This select club has a limited membership, as you can imagine. They call themselves skeptics, but – I think they put too much faith in the ability of the human mind to “think clearly†and be “objectiveâ€. Personally, I think these are two of humanities weakest traits. And simply bolting on a pair of binoculars or squinting through an electron microscope does little to alleviate the inherent weakness of man’s ability to PERCEIVE reality. (Shoot, even the electron microscope has simply enabled us to look deeply enough into the atom to say… “Where did it go? It was there just a second ago? It disappeared!!†Just like a magician’s trick! Man’s inability to observe is STILL perplexing him.)
So when are people gonna smell the coffee? Quantum physics has given us at least one fantastic insight… and that is…. we don’t know squat.
Spirit has a physics. It is just a different physics than we have embraced at this time.
Electrons have an explanation of where they go when they disappear, too.
-->
Stuff that goes on “behind the curtain†can go a long way to explaining and informing us.
But, if people say that there is NOTHING behind the curtain because we can not measure it, I fear we loose all hope of knowing “realityâ€.
…. And until that day comes along (meaning that “knowing†will no longer be limited to fleshly apparatuses of perception …) skeptics will remain…
…but I prefer to be numbered with those who are comfortable leaving the safety and security (or prison if you prefer) of the realm of tidy answers…
As a matter of fact… anyone can leave this dead-end flatland, today!
As you said, CM: “Or is there something really there that is real and will grow and those dark sayings of old will lighten the place up, the mind...â€
If a person can live with a high degree of uncertainty, then I am CERTAIN of at least one thing...
that person can grow in wonder and awe at the beauty we have that surrounds us!
If certainty and “reality†is a requirement for people in order that they will act... it should be known that at the end of the road is a dead-end sign.
A “Relative†type of experience in life acts like a new set of batteries in a flash light. The light won’t last forever, but – it will give you some light so you can get up and walk... and explore...
Or we can just sit in the dark - without a light, waiting for reality and certainty to find us…
Edited by Too Gray NowLink to comment
Share on other sites
CM
sort of a crossroads and many crossroads
as what we see in our minds meet with what we see
imagination and reality meet together
hopes and dreams meet with real experience
and growth of that which has become real
faith hope love
perhaps I've gone too far with words
perhaps not
if there is a chance to see dreams as a reality
yes....if.....
and if those dreams of life that seems to be promised are real then it's worth the chance to take a dive with words and see what connects...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
predictably
direct observation
kind of boring sometimes
the trickery is where it gets interesting (depending on the one in the wheel house) as opposed to what we have decided upon or forced ourselves to think is a stop sign and some sort of trick pulled on ourselves
and i think that maybe these two have to come to an agreement somewhere along the way in order to "feel" real....what may be or what may not be is depending upon taking the foot off the brake and hitting the gas
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheInvisibleDan
I object!
I...
ob-ject....
me...
ob-ject...
objecting...
am I....
Sorry to subject you to that...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
and thinking of TGN's posts up there somewhere.
My oldest when he was 1 year old couldn't understand why the animals would not talk to him. The birds and the squirrels were there and living as he was. He could talk but they would not. Dissappointment was real. He tryed his best talking to them but they would not speak back to him and he couldn't understand why.
And as he grew older and understood, an even greater understanding came to pass. That there is something a bit more special about people then animals. Which gave that real sense and feeling of wonderment and more imagination and greater possibilities...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
just want to say a quick thanks to you all for chiming in and playing along a while
good stuff, really. all of it. sorry i couldn't keep up, this time. someday maybe...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
Todd you bring tears to my eyes to hear from you,
I surely do enjoy your heart...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Too Gray Now
Danny had that thang goin' on -
:D-->
You know...
I Ob-ject!
I am an object.
Actually, I think he sparked something in what he said, on a more serious note.
If the "self" is any example of being a chip off the ole' block (READ: Created in God's Image)...
Then God must be an object - because that is what WE are convinced we are.
We sure do a lot of convincing... us humans... trying to convince others...
Hmmmmm
My experience meter still points to "BS Salesman" every time I get around people who spend an inordinate amount of time trying to convince others...
He (she) is usually the one who is a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic.
:P-->
I think, people think that God is an Object - because they think each of us are objects...
And each of us spends a LOT of individual time trying to explain our SELVES (personal, individual, self)to others -
Why would we do that? Hmmmm???
Maybe we are not individuals, seperated from God... Maybe...
Religion has spent so much time on sin because it is rooted in a duality of evil and good.
As long as we are on the evil side... we are seperated. Lord only knows... rel;igion sells the shi* out of that idea!!!
Forget the idea of Christ - that we are one with God. His idea, like Paul's - was that we live and move and have our very essence of being in God.
We have no REAL essence or REAL being - seperated from God. Just a false sense of self.
Sopmeone has been sellin' something... do ya think???
Religion... the purveyor of objects.
;)-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
hmmm...a chip off or of the block
of would put everyone together as an object
or would it be an object in itself...
maybe something different or bigger then..
cuz if we together are an object
something must be bigger then it
to make it an object
so ourselves collectively
an object....and......
that would mean i could be bigger then me.
not quite as alone as once understood
yet me has to be me, an object of an object
still...
perspectives....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Too Gray Now
CM...
I'm glad you grabbed onto that low fruit. Most people think that expressions are trite - I find them, often, VERY interesting.
I think you did an excellent job, pointing out the implications of the trite statement.
The impact of how a person looks at (perspective) of the self - is amazingly powerful.
Just went to see the Phantom of the Opera at the theater. The Phantom's image of his "self" was a mirror of his contorted visage. His view of his self led to destruction of his own making.
I found learning in this character. Learning about the impact of isolation and shame on a self.
Please allow me to go a bit further - If a creator is an object - then a destroyer is an object, too. (Kind of like saying if a quarter is a coin, than the heads side of it is every bit as much the “coin†as the tails side.)
A destroyer seems to sense himself as an object and sees his self as - wounded and detached (i.e. sees his "self" as cut off from intimacy with others BUT at the same time deeply connected to those things which isolate and wound him).
This seems to generate the energy and motive and means that an alienated self needs to accomplish destruction.
Geee... and we all know that we are urged by those “who are supposed to know†– that a healthy self image is one which is independent.
News flash… independence is only one small step away from isolation. And isolation does wound a self. And a wounded self becomes capable of amazing destruction.
Bottom line: the creative self does not flourish in the awareness of a subject/object relationship – but the destructive mechanisms require at least one “self†to BE the object and at least one OTHER “self†to BE the subject.
Welcome… to the Phantom of the Opera – we are living it. This play, for many people, is their “realityâ€.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
to make the object subject to..
or to subject the object to..
mainly watch what you are watching
and see that the 2d is 3d and 4d and further
easy to see even for the phantom
a tapestry of life
yes TGN..if the Creator is an object
it must also be the subject...
darn limitations of words...
cuz it's more then the two
seen or not seen, it's behind us and in front
hmmmm-perspective-without self in mind
but the perspective itself
to straiten a few things out, not only straightens it
but opens the road up to further investigation
which is hope, not that nothing was done already, and known
but that it continues to surprise around each corner
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first and last
Beloved Todd and all others
God bless you all
Ok I will play
Is God a object?
I would say God is a object and allso not a object because God is more than a object but at the same time less than a object.
God is the very objects or dirt that all things were created from but He allso all things that were here before that day of creation
God is light without a point of begining
otherwise God is more that words can tell you and less than words can tell you
God is so simple and small that I miss him at times and so big conplext that I see him everywhere
O I guess I did not pass the test but when I know as I am known ask me again and I get it right
thanks
with love and a holy kiss blowing your way Roy
PS I did not read all the replys so sorry if this answer was given before
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Too Gray Now
CM -
you are knockin' on some unified theory doors. I always liked that sound of the knuckles on that approach to truth.
Roy,
Glad you decided to play.
:)-->
And just for the record, I don't know who will pass the "test", either.
I do think that those who believe they got truth figured out, will likely be dealt a "do-over" sometime - just so they can come up with a different answer.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
yes....Yes....
we are subject of the object
and the object of the subject
who can see the ends of the universe?
just how big is it? Thanks Roy!
and this perspective (as we are terming it)
can and needs to expand so as not to be
trapped into only one view or 2 or 3
cuz the perspectives are the reality
not just a bunch of dust that breaths
and as eyes open wider....
there's more then one way to skin a cat
as they say in the south
or as Spock would say
"there's always alternatives"
perspective must not leave out "common sense"
in the sense of the conclusions seen, and concluded
will jive with Life and Love and Light
so just looking one way or 2 can destroy one's own
ability or desire to see the perspectiveSSSSSSS
and lead to wrong conclusions and actions
so being limited to image of "self"
as seen in a mirror is a narrow perspective
seeing more seeing is much more satisfying, peaceful
a better image of God who Himself is the image
so we can see it now as well as later
so there aint no hurry...to be with Christ
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
too cool, you guys
permit another tad spaz, if you will...
what you guys are writing of reminds me of how "it is written" that
the object/s and subject/s do eventually collapse into each other
...which can be quite romantic
resulting in a unity (like the unity of a 1 and 0)
and a more useful view of the illusion of duality
(duality being an illusion that a zero or a shadow or darkness equals a 1)
but in the unity, nothing changes but the point-of-view
which is a highly potent change, imo
and that this illusionary pair becomes a true one
and such a "marriage" then becomes a generative thing
(as in "child-bearing" or "creative")
ok, and so now we're talking about some sort of triunity to things, of course
which then can eventually comes a fourth-like perspective (within the unity)
and then a fifth perspective (still in unity)
and on and on, all building upon the next
kinda like DNA
same 4 letters simply writing and re-writing sentences and paragraphs
in this sense, i think the sacred "Word of God" is like an endless stream of objects
with endless streams of subjects
which altogether can also be viewed as the ultimate object of objects
and the ultimate subject of subjects
with some sort of relationship (healthy or otherwise) always developing and trying to happen between this real illusionary duo of 1 and 0
but the most direct and simplest ground it all rises from is always the generic “zero,†in a sense.
(which I prefer to think of it as the ultimate clearing, or gracious spacious inviting…a truly nameless something)
kinda like how "god speaks" out of a "whirlwind"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
thanks for bringing it back to simple todd
i like simple....
can get lost in some realities
and not find the way back to that 0
peace
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.