A look forward in hope

For intuitive and critical discussions, from spirituality to theological doctrines. Fair warning: because the subject matter is personal, moderation is strict.

Moderator: Dan~

Re: A look forward in hope

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Mon Apr 25, 2022 11:09 am

Bob wrote:
Urwrongx1000 wrote:My opinion of Christianity, is that if you claim to "Love Christ", then you are Obligated/Responsibility to change your life to align with His.

Wow, this is really a revelation, especially considering the vitriol you have been spouting.

It seems that the way people you oppose people is to accuse them of what you are yourself doing.

You are on ignore because I have seldom read such hateful and bigoted opinions as yours. Then to attack me (although I am far from perfect) in a thread that is looking for hope to overcome hatred - that is the peak of hypocrisy.

I'm not the one claiming to be a Christian.

So you just outed yourself. So much for your "Hope". No wonder you have never found Him.
Urwrongx1000
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7941
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: A look forward in hope

Postby Mad Man P » Mon Apr 25, 2022 2:08 pm

Bob wrote:This is also curious and perhaps a sign of “just how wrong your reading of me is.” Your obsession with whips and swords, whereas I have been speaking about finding ways towards an open hand of friendship, of compassion and seeing our neighbour as fundamentally the same as ourselves, is very suggestive. I’m not sure of how you mean to “steer into our tribalism”, what exactly? And what is “it” that should “work for us instead of against us”?


I'm surprised you couldn't guess the answer since you just went on to mention it yourself as a wonderful thing to achieve.
Solidarity... that's the good we can salvage from our natural tribalism. When you're part of a tribe, there's solidarity within. If we can harness that, and rig the circumstances so as to avoid triggering a tribal war... we're golden.


But then you pretend that there are not already different ideas integrated in our societies, enabling people to live as they want to. If you could extend that ability to encompass diversity, whilst all the time steering towards the common goal of overcoming conflicts, you already have a humanity approaching an understanding of unity. It isn’t just about tolerance, but accepting the diversity, promoting it even, like we already do in our constitutions, guaranteeing the freedom to worship as you want to. In such agreements, it is the common good, the unity of a society that mustn’t be infringed upon.


With quite a disapproving tone, You said "Tribalism is about keeping individuals from wandering off or joining other groups and also leads to bullying when a tribal member is unwilling to conform to the politics of the collective, especially when dictated by a despotic leader."

I'm very confused about your values here... and so I offer this hypothetical in hopes that it will clarify what it is you're recommending:

If individuals within our nation, united by some shared vision or project want to form a new tribe, their own sovereignty, away from the "diverse collective"... what then ought we do? They don't accept us, then don't value our input, in fact they would very much like to be free of us... but they are willing to tolerate our independence if we return the favor. Should we demand acceptance and unity? or should we settle for tolerance and allow them their freedom?


Unfortunately, the resources have always been manipulated for the markets. The markets also rush in to exploit weaknesses, trends, and insecurity. You only have to watch the news for that. Sadly, those who make policies reckon with greed as a motivator for commerce, rather than the further development of society and overcoming of problems.


Perhaps they don't have a solution to the problem of limited resources any more than you or I do... which means it's a competition and not the friendly kind.
We can call it greed, if you like... but by that measure trees are greedy, birds are greedy, wolves are greedy... all of nature is greed.
There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.
User avatar
Mad Man P
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2822
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 7:32 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: A look forward in hope

Postby Meno_ » Mon Apr 25, 2022 2:37 pm

Mad Man P wrote:
Bob wrote:This is also curious and perhaps a sign of “just how wrong your reading of me is.” Your obsession with whips and swords, whereas I have been speaking about finding ways towards an open hand of friendship, of compassion and seeing our neighbour as fundamentally the same as ourselves, is very suggestive. I’m not sure of how you mean to “steer into our tribalism”, what exactly? And what is “it” that should “work for us instead of against us”?


I'm surprised you couldn't guess the answer since you just went on to mention it yourself as a wonderful thing to achieve.
Solidarity... that's the good we can salvage from our natural tribalism. When you're part of a tribe, there's solidarity within. If we can harness that, and rig the circumstances so as to avoid triggering a tribal war... we're golden.


But then you pretend that there are not already different ideas integrated in our societies, enabling people to live as they want to. If you could extend that ability to encompass diversity, whilst all the time steering towards the common goal of overcoming conflicts, you already have a humanity approaching an understanding of unity. It isn’t just about tolerance, but accepting the diversity, promoting it even, like we already do in our constitutions, guaranteeing the freedom to worship as you want to. In such agreements, it is the common good, the unity of a society that mustn’t be infringed upon.


With quite a disapproving tone, You said "Tribalism is about keeping individuals from wandering off or joining other groups and also leads to bullying when a tribal member is unwilling to conform to the politics of the collective, especially when dictated by a despotic leader."

I'm very confused about your values here... and so I offer this hypothetical in hopes that it will clarify what it is you're recommending:

If individuals within our nation, united by some shared vision or project want to form a new tribe, their own sovereignty, away from the "diverse collective"... what then ought we do? They don't accept us, then don't value our input, in fact they would very much like to be free of us... but they are willing to tolerate our independence if we return the favor. Should we demand acceptance and unity? or should we settle for tolerance and allow them their freedom?


Unfortunately, the resources have always been manipulated for the markets. The markets also rush in to exploit weaknesses, trends, and insecurity. You only have to watch the news for that. Sadly, those who make policies reckon with greed as a motivator for commerce, rather than the further development of society and overcoming of problems.


Perhaps they don't have a solution to the problem of limited resources any more than you or I do... which means it's a competition and not the friendly kind.
We can call it greed, if you like... but by that measure trees are greedy, birds are greedy, wolves are greedy... all of nature is greed.




Believe it or not, surely this is not fit for a Ripley's categorical decision, maybe even a poll on the matter may be inadequate.
But first impressions do sometimes take a toll, Max.

Because I don't think your feelings about it could appropriate a name that''s fitting venue from get smart. Anyhow don't get 'angry for this is a mini-mirror; a gentler, kinder place supposedly then what's going down out there.
Meno_
The Invisible One
 
Posts: 13265
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: A look forward in hope

Postby Bob » Mon Apr 25, 2022 2:45 pm

Mad Man P wrote:With quite a disapproving tone, You said "Tribalism is about keeping individuals from wandering off or joining other groups and also leads to bullying when a tribal member is unwilling to conform to the politics of the collective, especially when dictated by a despotic leader."

I'm very confused about your values here... and so I offer this hypothetical in hopes that it will clarify what it is you're recommending:

If individuals within our nation, united by some shared vision or project want to form a new tribe, their own sovereignty, away from the "diverse collective"... what then ought we do? They don't accept us, then don't value our input, in fact they would very much like to be free of us... but they are willing to tolerate our independence if we return the favor. Should we demand acceptance and unity? or should we settle for tolerance and allow them their freedom?

The “tone” you hear is in your own head. There is no tone in written word. It was actually a paraphrased quote.

You pose a question that I have already answered, many times, even in the quote you posted this time. There are already different ideas integrated in our societies, enabling people to live as they want to. If you could extend that ability to encompass diversity, whilst all the time steering towards the common goal of overcoming conflicts, you already have a humanity approaching an understanding of unity. It isn’t just about tolerance, but accepting the diversity, promoting it even, like we already do in our constitutions, guaranteeing the freedom to worship as you want to. In such agreements, it is the common good, the unity of a society that mustn’t be infringed upon. Personal freedom only extends to the border of our neighbour’s personal freedom. If we can agree on that, we can live together.

Mad Man P wrote:We can call it greed, if you like... but by that measure trees are greedy, birds are greedy, wolves are greedy... all of nature is greed.

Sorry about repetition, but I said this last time: Greed isn’t satisfying needs, but when wealth becomes a status symbol of superiority that you have to show everybody, when you have to blend out the needy or any thought of generosity, when your surplus doesn’t encourage you to help someone you could. You see the people in their expensive cars, draped in expensive clothes, flashing expensive jewellery and watches, but avoiding any mention of current affairs and people in need. Unfortunately, there is an audience that laps this up and tries to pretend that it can be like their role models, at least to some extent. This way individualism spreads mental poverty, and contributes to escapism, rather than attending to what needs attending to.

Therefore, in my book, nature isn’t greedy.
The only wisdom we can hope to acquire
Is the wisdom of humility: humility is endless.
TS Eliot
When you are out of touch with reality you will easily embrace a delusion, and equally put in doubt the most basic elements of existence. If this reminds you of the mindset of the present day materialist science and philosophy establishments, as well as of the loudest voices in the socio-political debate, we should not be particularly surprised, since they show all the signs of attending with the left hemisphere alone. I live in the hope that that may soon change: for without a change we are lost.
McGilchrist, Iain . The Matter With Things: Our Brains, Our Delusions and the Unmaking of the World (S.562). Perspectiva Press. Kindle-Version.
User avatar
Bob
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4217
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 6:20 pm
Location: Germany

Re: A look forward in hope

Postby Bob » Mon Apr 25, 2022 3:26 pm

In a recent conversation entitled “The War on Reality”, Mary Harrington and Paul Kingsnorth sat down with David Fuller from Rebel Wisdom, to talk about the recent developments in academia and largely western society. They saw a struggle going on between modernity and the more traditional people of society, and chaos ensuing. They saw post-modernists regarding everything as a social construct, including biological aspects of life, and a fervour for transcending the limits of the natural world. Paul Kingsnorth, an environmentalist had this to say about the interconnectedness of all things:
Really, this is a conversation about the interconnectedness of all things, and the fact that there's no separation between humans and nature, and that we're entirely reliant on everything else. But living in urban interconnected societies, we can very easily pretend that that's not true, until we start keeping chickens, or any number of other things, but it is exactly why it is impossible for the new metaphysics of the machine to succeed in the end, because what it's trying to do is, as I say, to create a new world on the basis that the current world is a standing reserve. On the basis of the current world is just a fake, or not a fake but a pure material realm, that there's nothing to it. There's no consciousness wider than the human mind, that there's no real interconnections, that there's nothing sacred, that there's nothing higher than us, that there's nothing that may be operating outside our purview, and that's not true. And that's not a religious claim either, you can read any number of scientific papers these days about the consciousness of trees, and the interconnectedness of fungal mycelia, and any number of interesting studies, which demonstrate that things that are not human, tend to be a lot more conscious and interconnected than we might assume in the modern age, which incidentally is something that most indigenous people know instinctively and traditionally. So, that's real, so what we are doing precisely, is trying to break apart and instrumentalize and break down into material parts, something which actually is alive, that we're part of, which is the planet itself. We're literally playing God, except God knows what he's doing and we don't, and that's why it hits the buffers, and it will keep hitting the buffers, and at the micro level, a human body is a real thing and you can't change it beyond a certain point, and at the macro level there's something very big and interwoven going on with the planet itself, that we don't understand, and we can't fiddle with beyond a certain point. We're just going to learn it the hard way. That's what's going to happen. We're going to learn it the hard way, because we don't want to learn it by paying attention.

This also has to do with finding peace with nature, and actually returning to being part of it, rather than assuming ourselves to be apart or above nature. We have been manipulating nature, exploiting and destroying it for a little while in comparison to the age of the planet, and already we are feeling the consequences of that. There is a real danger that we could underestimate what nature could do to rid itself of a disturbance and learn it the hard way.

In the same way, we need to understand that we are part of the human race, and no-one stands apart or above it. The wars that we have fought throughout history have shown us what it means not to accept that each of us, every person, every family, every tribe, or nation is a part of a larger collective. The ultimative weapon has been tested in 1945 on people, and we have seen its power. Modern versions have a greater destructive potential, which we should avoid testing on people. I have been writing here to find ways to take steps to avoid this.

Wherever the conflict, we must ask ourselves whether we are just trying to avoid the inevitable fact that we are a part of nature, just as we are a part of humanity. Can we accept that, and find ways to live in harmony? A symphony employs vastly different instruments to produce its melodies that enchant us. Can we embrace the same kind of diversity in humanity, and produce a sound that enchants us all?
The only wisdom we can hope to acquire
Is the wisdom of humility: humility is endless.
TS Eliot
When you are out of touch with reality you will easily embrace a delusion, and equally put in doubt the most basic elements of existence. If this reminds you of the mindset of the present day materialist science and philosophy establishments, as well as of the loudest voices in the socio-political debate, we should not be particularly surprised, since they show all the signs of attending with the left hemisphere alone. I live in the hope that that may soon change: for without a change we are lost.
McGilchrist, Iain . The Matter With Things: Our Brains, Our Delusions and the Unmaking of the World (S.562). Perspectiva Press. Kindle-Version.
User avatar
Bob
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4217
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 6:20 pm
Location: Germany

Re: A look forward in hope

Postby Mad Man P » Mon Apr 25, 2022 3:32 pm

Bob wrote:The “tone” you hear is in your own head. There is no tone in written word. It was actually a paraphrased quote.

You pose a question that I have already answered, many times, even in the quote you posted this time.


Apologies for the misunderstanding... that was not me paraphrasing the section I quoted.
I plucked that quote directly from an earlier conversation

And you repeating what you've already told me does not help clarify your position, perhaps I'm simply too dense or perhaps it's too unclear.
That's why I offered you the hypothetical to help me understand what your meaning might be. I'd very much like for you to answer it, as that would help me understand your position.

If individuals within our nation, united by some shared vision or project want to form a new tribe, their own sovereignty, away from the "diverse collective"... what then ought we do? They don't accept us, then don't value our input, in fact they would very much like to be free of us... but they are willing to tolerate our independence if we return the favor. Should we demand acceptance and unity? or should we settle for tolerance and allow them their freedom?

It isn’t just about tolerance, but accepting the diversity, promoting it even, like we already do in our constitutions, guaranteeing the freedom to worship as you want to.


The people in the hypothetical are rejecting what you're saying... are they not?
They want to live by different laws, have a different tax system... different government, their own borders... precisely to get away from our "diversity" by reject membership to anyone not in agreement with their values.
How are they part of anything you're talking about?
They are wanting to fully separate and divorce themselves from the diversity so they can be ruled by their shared vision without having to compromise.

What ought we do about that? if anything..
There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.
User avatar
Mad Man P
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2822
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 7:32 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: A look forward in hope

Postby Mad Man P » Mon Apr 25, 2022 3:45 pm

Meno_ wrote:Believe it or not, surely this is not fit for a Ripley's categorical decision, maybe even a poll on the matter may be inadequate.
But first impressions do sometimes take a toll, Max.

Because I don't think your feelings about it could appropriate a name that''s fitting venue from get smart. Anyhow don't get 'angry for this is a mini-mirror; a gentler, kinder place supposedly then what's going down out there.


It's not exactly like I'm thrilled about the circumstance... but a lot our choices in this world are about picking the least lethal poison to drink... It's the ones who promise you kool aid that you should be weary off.
There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.
User avatar
Mad Man P
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2822
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 7:32 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: A look forward in hope

Postby Ichthus77 » Mon Apr 25, 2022 3:47 pm

Mad Man P wrote:
Bob wrote:The “tone” you hear is in your own head. There is no tone in written word. It was actually a paraphrased quote.

You pose a question that I have already answered, many times, even in the quote you posted this time.


Apologies for the misunderstanding... that was not me paraphrasing the section I quoted.
I plucked that quote directly from an earlier conversation

And you repeating what you've already told me does not help clarify your position, perhaps I'm simply too dense or perhaps it's too unclear.
That's why I offered you the hypothetical to help me understand what your meaning might be. I'd very much like for you to answer it, as that would help me understand your position.

If individuals within our nation, united by some shared vision or project want to form a new tribe, their own sovereignty, away from the "diverse collective"... what then ought we do? They don't accept us, then don't value our input, in fact they would very much like to be free of us... but they are willing to tolerate our independence if we return the favor. Should we demand acceptance and unity? or should we settle for tolerance and allow them their freedom?

It isn’t just about tolerance, but accepting the diversity, promoting it even, like we already do in our constitutions, guaranteeing the freedom to worship as you want to.


The people in the hypothetical are rejecting what you're saying... are they not?
They want to live by different laws, have a different tax system... different government, their own borders... precisely to get away from our "diversity" by reject membership to anyone not in agreement with their values.
How are they part of anything you're talking about?
They are wanting to fully separate and divorce themselves from the diversity so they can be ruled by their shared vision without having to compromise.

What ought we do about that? if anything..


If they aren’t hurting anybody, let them go.
Fall semester ends 12/16/22. Apologies if I do not reply immediately.

“In choosing myself, I choose the other.”
- A marriage of Sartre & Levinas
User avatar
Ichthus77
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6041
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 6:48 pm
Location: pale blue clump of star particles

Re: A look forward in hope

Postby Bob » Mon Apr 25, 2022 4:26 pm

Mad Man P wrote:The people in the hypothetical are rejecting what you're saying... are they not?
They want to live by different laws, have a different tax system... different government, their own borders... precisely to get away from our "diversity" by reject membership to anyone not in agreement with their values.
How are they part of anything you're talking about?
They are wanting to fully separate and divorce themselves from the diversity so they can be ruled by their shared vision without having to compromise.

What ought we do about that? if anything..

What does the law say?
The only wisdom we can hope to acquire
Is the wisdom of humility: humility is endless.
TS Eliot
When you are out of touch with reality you will easily embrace a delusion, and equally put in doubt the most basic elements of existence. If this reminds you of the mindset of the present day materialist science and philosophy establishments, as well as of the loudest voices in the socio-political debate, we should not be particularly surprised, since they show all the signs of attending with the left hemisphere alone. I live in the hope that that may soon change: for without a change we are lost.
McGilchrist, Iain . The Matter With Things: Our Brains, Our Delusions and the Unmaking of the World (S.562). Perspectiva Press. Kindle-Version.
User avatar
Bob
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4217
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 6:20 pm
Location: Germany

Previous

Return to Religion and Spirituality



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron