morals and money

[vurt]

guess that explains why people always think he has a beard

[Sicklecell666]

guess that explains why people always think he has a beard

That's not a beard, it's a goatee..commoon misconception, but in truth he's a big trance fan.

[vurt]

see now i always figured floyd greatful dead and that sort of stuff,maybe a bit of jefferson airplane too

[chagzuki]

A concept is just a pattern of electrons in our heads. There will never be perfect cube, just our imagination of one.

No. no. no. Where then is the concept of "never"? It's not in the material realm, and certainly not merely a pattern in one's head. It's the old philosophical question of whether the sound of the tree falling exists whether there is a conscious being there to witness it or not. But we all know that the sound goes on without us...

Time to bring out the old Wittgensteinian ordinary language philosophical method.
Whether there is or is not a pattern of electrons etc., THAT is not the concept.
It is entirely wrong to try to apply spatial characteristics to a concept. There are 2 meanings of 'existence' getting confused here: that of physical objects, and that of concepts. The use of the word 'existence' is different in these 2 cases.
The argument that because concepts exist, but not in the material realm, and therefore there must be another realm in which they exist is just a tripping up over the language used: conflating these 2 seperate uses. That a concept 'exists' means only that we use a concept, but we get confused and think that existence MUST have the meaning in the material sense, therefore our concepts must have some material characteristics. But to say that there must be another realm in which a concept exists other than the physical is really to postulate something identical to the physical, i.e. to use the physical as a model. This is all confusion.

[Karbon L. Forms]

Re chagzuki

I think I'm with you on that. Not sure as I think i'm out of my depth!

"Existence precedes essence" J.P.Sartre.

[Wopelka]

Time to bring out the old Wittgensteinian ordinary language philosophical method.
Whether there is or is not a pattern of electrons etc., THAT is not the concept.
It is entirely wrong to try to apply spatial characteristics to a concept. There are 2 meanings of 'existence' getting confused here: that of physical objects, and that of concepts. The use of the word 'existence' is different in these 2 cases.
The argument that because concepts exist, but not in the material realm, and therefore there must be another realm in which they exist is just a tripping up over the language used: conflating these 2 seperate uses. That a concept 'exists' means only that we use a concept, but we get confused and think that existence MUST have the meaning in the material sense, therefore our concepts must have some material characteristics. But to say that there must be another realm in which a concept exists other than the physical is really to postulate something identical to the physical, i.e. to use the physical as a model. This is all confusion.

thanks for making things easier: these lines sum up nicely a lot of what i was willing to say in my previous post about the 'morality' concept.

[Sonicseven]

There is an old Chinese saying from Lao Tsu "Those that speak, do not know. Those that know do not speak"

[chagzuki]

He said that, did he?

[Karbon L. Forms]

He said that, did he?

Quality! Oh lordy me side hurts again!

[nuffink]

There is an old Chinese saying from Lao Tsu "Those that speak, do not know. Those that know do not speak"

Is that from his famous work "The Art of Middle Management"?

[Alive In Chernobyl]

I learned this phrase playing basketball at this recreation center by here I think this fits well.


Who the f**k gives a flying shit? Get on with the game.

[Karbon L. Forms]

I learned this phrase playing basketball at this recreation center by here I think this fits well.


Who the f**k gives a flying shit? Get on with the game.

I knew you'd sort it.

[fake]

Phew... money, morals, philsophy and now god!

Don't confuse god with religion. Religion is about the messengers. God was here befor them.

God is like an atom. You can't see or photograph one as the closer you look the further away it gets. You know they are there, they can even split one apart. One on its own can't be seen but if you stand back you can see the whole picture.

Its the lack of morals and the sheer greed for wealth that eventually destroys things. Just look at the problems with the world today, starvation, pollution etc. It can all be cured easily and quickly but the need for greed and the lack of morality is stopping it from happening.

Shows you what a crap world it has become when a leisure complex has to be built to relieve stressed out people!

So, thumbs up for a moral stance!

fake

[spaceman]

wow.. 8 pages and still.. er.. civil?

[kvr loves islamophobes]

So there’s a Buddhist version of the story too? Yes, there are a lot of very similar if not identical Zen and Sufi teaching stories and also many similar techniques for “enlightenment”. Also a shared love of quality tea.


I don’t use an automobile either and never have. My interest here isn’t even foremost about environmentalism as I don’t think anything in this world is going to improve for Muslims until the wahhabis quit getting rich off of oil.

Of course someone must feed his family. But in the west at least it is very unlikely someone must compromise his ethics totally to do so. If you were a street urchin in Delhi or Juarez I could understand this. I myself know very well what it means to go without food. I also know what it means to have to work a job you hate, but in the west you have that option at least. If your children are hungry you can always go to the mall and become a “Pizza engineer” or even telemarketing, (my uncle put himself through college in the u.s. back in the seventies painting houses so he wouldn’t have to change his appearance) That’s just for an unskilled worker, most of the people on this board are intelligent enough to find other ways to survive. May not be glamorous or exciting or even easy but it is possible. Compromising the integrity of your music, let alone your deepest beliefs is a luxury you have in the west. As such it is unnecessary, your survival will not depend upon it. Your quality of life may be a different thing altogether, but that is a personal choice, and someone who chooses to sacrifice their own quality of life for something they believe in is commendable to me.

About morphic fields, some of the applications of Sheldrakes ideas to machines are fascinating. Coil did some work along these lines with analog mono synths, I think some of which ended up on the “time machines” release. I did some myself just putting a micromoog right next to an odyssey and playing them at the same time into an se 70. The results were far beyond anything they normally would accomplish even if they were on opposite sides of the room, I used this as my main performance setup for a year or so, and sometimes the results were so alien that people became terrified, things that truly sounded chthonic, like Dawn period Current 93 if it had been made by Sun Ra.

I tried to read an English translation of Wittgenstein’s Tractatus and was bested by it.


Hellenic philosophy, especially Aristotle is not something I think mixed well with religion (most non Manichean conceptions of god conflict with this at some level and cause massive theological problems, in Islam this would be the Ismailis).