KFA - Krishnamurti Foundation of America

RJ wrote:

"the thing I hate about an argument is that it always interrupts a discussion"
(G K Chesterton)

RJ has posted a sentiment that seems to have a commonsense bend about it; something gets in the way of something else, and that *getting in the way of* creates a problem for that something else, which is why that something else does not like what that something did.

Look, buster, get out of my way, or you will regret it!

Ok, so what is an argument? It is that which creates a problem for a given line of thought, and that because it offers resistance of some sort to the point being made in the discussion.

A discussion would then be two lines of thought going to the same point as in agreement, and an argument would then be two lines of thought going to different points as in disagreement.

This defining would then require two points for a disagreement and one point for an agreement. Ok, that has a commonsense hue about it. It says, "I do not like someone who sees things differently."

That raises an interesting question: Can I have a discussion, as peers, with someone who sees things differently without getting into an argument over that disagreement? If I can, then G K Chesterton is guilty of posting a sentiment in black and white terms that has a hue of grey hanging over it.

If history is any judge of that, I have found only two exceptions to that rule; and both of those others were men of the cloth; one a seminary student and the other a retired pastor. I have found no such exceptions here.

Hi RJ, do you think a discussion on theism is possible between a theist and an a-theist?

Do you think it is possible for a theist and an a-theist to discuss their reasoning behind the answer to that question?

What happened to the RJ with whom I used to banter, were you this RJ or did you change horses in mid stream?

who hasn't bought a load of crap at some point in their life? Anyone, anyone?  Getting burned happens. Use salve and stretch a lot.  I too enjoyed the perspective of RJ before he got burned at the stake.  That dude is still there but different now.  Both are images and identifications, yeah yeah, but this image is caught in the pain of what happens when you buy a load of crap and carry it further only because it is what you now know.

buck up and meet us here old friend, the fire is just getting warm.

What goes on with identification?

wilbro99 wrote:

natura on fire: "I bet, one day you could be able to see your whole house has since long been in fire, but meanwhile you couldn’t distinguish the analysing from watching and therefore didn’t notice that before."

Ah, I must analyze that; can't resist – to analyze the difference between observing and analyzing means that I can observe my self analyzing and analyze my observations at the same time…

…[mandatory chuckle]

Analysis is the process of observing and breaking down a complex topic or substance into smaller parts to gain a better understanding of it. (Wikipedia).
Analysis is opposed to Synthesis.
Both are working together, both are instruments of human logic and are responsible for multiplying words and producing ideas, imaginations, feelings which means increasing intensity of inner in the brainand and outer talking.

Simple watching doesn’t separate a whole into its component parts. Watching is just registration of facts.

E.g. you are watching one movie after the other and you see that makes you deadly tired however interesting those movies might be.
That’s a fact. Don’t know about you, I can see it pretty easily. I don’t make any analysing, I just see it, I understand and I know it.

I’m not talking about total, undivided attention right now in this thread and I’m not saying the fact is the truth. The fact remains verbal statement and truth remains somewhere beyond (if exists at all).

My target is not the truth, but rather a component of myself: observing and discovering the intercorrelation between inner chatter and suffering.
Later we could be able to see how to use it practically on the negative approach to truth, but right know the problem is just to notice and see it in your own inner world. So, it's not about to believe or not to believe my words, not to be convinced by me, but just to see the facts on your own.

That’s what I expect from anyone here who might be interested.

Last edited by natura (2012-03-17 04:41:40)

natura, it is obvious that suffering and inner talking are connected, they come to the table together to eat.  Look anytime you are in a suffering state and it can be seen straight away, the repetitive patterns with imagery attached.

joe wrote:

natura, it is obvious that suffering and inner talking are connected, they come to the table together to eat.  Look anytime you are in a suffering state and it can be seen straight away, the repetitive patterns with imagery attached.

Nice to know it’s obvious to you, joe.

Thanks for your effective support, see it the same way too.

Just a little while around this point and we are going further on.

kirsten wrote:

all these outer exchanges are similar to the inner talking
i mean, the many personalities and different views, division.
division as a divided vision and the mind trying to see it clear.. that's the struggle.
while there may be only those multi-visions, naturally that seems to be most likely.

Sometimes, other times it's just birdsong.

natura wrote:

RJ wrote:

http://timblair.spleenville.com/archive … ichael.jpg

Is that another interpretation of story about Christ, RJ?

Have you composed it on your own?

Via the hands of Leunig: a truly good fellow from Oz

Christ?
Narcissus would be closer

joe wrote:

who hasn't bought a load of crap at some point in their life? Anyone, anyone?  Getting burned happens. Use salve and stretch a lot.  I too enjoyed the perspective of RJ before he got burned at the stake.  That dude is still there but different now.  Both are images and identifications, yeah yeah, but this image is caught in the pain of what happens when you buy a load of crap and carry it further only because it is what you now know.

buck up and meet us here old friend, the fire is just getting warm.

What goes on with identification?

oh Joe!
have you ever noticed how your second impression of a fellow feels more compelling than the first?
'Now, this time, I know! '
don't worry, the third will seem certain, for sure...

I like you Joe, (with your warm wing)
I like it that you mash your metaphors willy-nilly and let us not cast aspersion on the idea of getting someone closer to a fire who you have just described as burned and in need of salves

but, dear fellow, you still palbably do not feel me
may I suggest you ignore all such conundrums and attend to your own sickness within,
with all haste and alacrity

I can assure you that Nature has more intelligence than all your esteemed relative's reputations combined. Quickly, before it fades away! (the second coming is always stronger than the first)

oh, I was about to send and realised that last will read as obtuse
I am up for fun and games anywhere you wish to play
except for sickness
that's serious

by second coming I refer to the exact phenomena of mysterious unidentifiable fatigue dominated illnesses that come for extended times and then just as strangely vanish.
It is a language of the body far louder than anything our heads can come up with. I know this territory well. Look within, stop what stops you being with what is within. Because the second time this comes is much worse than the first, if unattended.

still obtuse?
read some Bruce Lipton on immunology (wonderful American doctor and scientist, currently based in NZ and teaching my son in his first year of Chiropractic college after finishing his college degree in pyschology)
he's wildly enthusiastic and prone to long-windedness
but he feels the love for sure
such good fellows abound

natura wrote:

kirsten wrote:

all these outer exchanges are similar to the inner talking
i mean, the many personalities and different views, division.
division as a divided vision and the mind trying to see it clear.. that's the struggle.
while there may be only those multi-visions, naturally that seems to be most likely.

I think it is an excellent message.

So can we say that the outer, visible talking is the prolongation of the inner one?

The inner chatter coming up, from some depth of our consciousness which we cannot really see clearly enough, on the upper level and get mixed up with the current thought we have already got on it. Right?

thanx
i'm not sure about what comes first..
when being born there is much blank,
and conditionings color the inner and outer.

RJ wrote:

joe wrote:

who hasn't bought a load of crap at some point in their life? Anyone, anyone?  Getting burned happens. Use salve and stretch a lot.  I too enjoyed the perspective of RJ before he got burned at the stake.  That dude is still there but different now.  Both are images and identifications, yeah yeah, but this image is caught in the pain of what happens when you buy a load of crap and carry it further only because it is what you now know.

buck up and meet us here old friend, the fire is just getting warm.

What goes on with identification?

oh Joe!
have you ever noticed how your second impression of a fellow feels more compelling than the first?
'Now, this time, I know! '
don't worry, the third will seem certain, for sure...

I like you Joe, (with your warm wing)
I like it that you mash your metaphors willy-nilly and let us not cast aspersion on the idea of getting someone closer to a fire who you have just described as burned and in need of salves

but, dear fellow, you still palbably do not feel me
may I suggest you ignore all such conundrums and attend to your own sickness within,
with all haste and alacrity

I can assure you that Nature has more intelligence than all your esteemed relative's reputations combined. Quickly, before it fades away! (the second coming is always stronger than the first)

oh, I was about to send and realised that last will read as obtuse
I am up for fun and games anywhere you wish to play
except for sickness
that's serious

by second coming I refer to the exact phenomena of mysterious unidentifiable fatigue dominated illnesses that come for extended times and then just as strangely vanish.
It is a language of the body far louder than anything our heads can come up with. I know this territory well. Look within, stop what stops you being with what is within. Because the second time this comes is much worse than the first, if unattended.

still obtuse?
read some Bruce Lipton on immunology (wonderful American doctor and scientist, currently based in NZ and teaching my son in his first year of Chiropractic college after finishing his college degree in pyschology)
he's wildly enthusiastic and prone to long-windedness
but he feels the love for sure
such good fellows abound

Oh Chiron, the wounded healer, you come!

Mine was a fungal spore, RJ, picked it up in the desert hiking.  Nothing mysterious, no meaning to fill in, just a little fungus that got in and had some fun doing its thing.

kirsten wrote:

natura wrote:

kirsten wrote:

all these outer exchanges are similar to the inner talking
i mean, the many personalities and different views, division.
division as a divided vision and the mind trying to see it clear.. that's the struggle.
while there may be only those multi-visions, naturally that seems to be most likely.

I think it is an excellent message.

So can we say that the outer, visible talking is the prolongation of the inner one?

The inner chatter coming up, from some depth of our consciousness which we cannot really see clearly enough, on the upper level and get mixed up with the current thought we have already got on it. Right?

thanx
i'm not sure about what comes first..
when being born there is much blank,
and conditionings color the inner and outer.

So, Kirsten, you don’t see you might have got any prehistory of your life before you were born.

You think everything, including conditioning, was spontaneously started from scratch since two human cells, male’s and female’s, met themselves in your mother’s womb.

At this particular moment it was decided you will be developing as a female Kirsten with all uncountable amount of your other qualities including all timetable like start and end of your puberty, growth and some psychological attitudes to life that are usually called ‘inherited’.

That’s alright, however, because neither we can prove anything, nor we can now see anything for sure out of our current state of abilities as well as we don’t want any pointless believing, speculations and arguing on this forum.

We can do only what we can. I think that’s the only right position.