Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

The way things are - The way things ought to be

Walking the plank a bit further:

In regards to the "irrefutable" nature of the process explicated by crow:

Looking at it, it does seem proper that it is, in a sense, irrefutable: he recognizes the change in himself prior to some moment(s) of understanding, and thus achieves a higher state from which he can look back at and compare his prior attempts at understanding. Now, this obviously is the height of subjectivity; which poses a problem for those of us who want to test everything before not-ever-fully trusting it. We cannot know whether he ever had this enlightenment experience, nor what it contained, nor what was actually realized by him.

However, we hold various characters in history in high regard: Lao-tse, Buddha, Jesus [the philosophic compassion of enlightenment aspect, not the liberalism/Christianity™], along with usually unnamed pagan teachers, though identities of some survive, such as among the Greeks. We know far less about these humans than we do about crow, we don't even know whether these people actually existed; however, their ideas confer value to us and we measure their effects upon us as individuals.

To state that all off this is a misapprehension and derives from a psychological pretense seems erroneous, which is probably why crow dismisses those claims without providing any further evidence or explication, as it isn't necessary and wouldn't convince the people who make them anyway.

If we then accept that there is value to this type of attempt to describe an individual's "process of becoming", we must be confronted that when objectively analyzed, there is a common strand running through all of them. We must then use our judgment to determine whether or not this is represented honestly by crow. If it's a deception, at least it's based upon valuable ideas that are worth coming back through again; if it's an honest endeavor, then it retains that while adding far more value of dignity.

Additionally, there isn't an iron hard "THOU SHALLT" coming from any of the afore-mentioned teachers [their followers, on the other hand...]. They "simply" offer their perspective on a similar process of achieving a differing state. There is a large difference in the individuals' beliefs which are additional to the moment of understanding [science, religion, politics, etc]. These people could probably have quite conflicting discussions about all of these areas, all while not denying the original process which led to their understanding. It seems that crow is irritated not by that, but by the method of conversation which denies the understanding can ever occur.

[Insert copy-crow charge here]

Well well well well wellllll....
If a crow can be amazed, one just was.
Now THAT is the way to make use of intelligence.

I can't seem to do what you just did.
Brett has mentioned to me, before, that he doesn't know why I don't ever bother to set the stage for what I write, in order that readers know 'where I am coming from'.
But to me - rather inconveniently - I no longer can imagine any other place I could be coming from.

Part of transitioning from the thoroughly mediocre character I once was, to whatever I am now, has been the necessary and total abandonment of every aspect of then.

It's all lost. Gone down in the flood. Vanished from history. Good riddance to it.
The Eye Of The Needle.

We know far less about these humans than we do about crow

Sorry just a nitpick here, that isnt true. We dont know anything about crow except what he himself says and does on this forum and other places on the internet. Anyway you got one of those pats (beaks?) on the head so I am sure you said something right.

One reason I so rarely listen to music is the brainwashing aspect of subjecting myself to both the often terrible lyrics, and the automatic-machine-beat of the rhythm. I observe people bopping around to some invisible beat, and the common repetition of lyrics as meaningful cliches.
You have to consider that most modern 'musicians' are what they are because they can do nothing else, have no experience, no intellect, and no lives. They are probably - as a group - the least likely people to be authoring words of wisdom, which is exactly what many listeners consider their words to be.

She loves you.

There are two kinds of music: shitty pop music, and Music.

But, there are times when the pop music can rise above. Here is pop music done right:


Like it?

I get the most out of disagreeing with crow outright,  regardless of whether I have some investment (emotional, psychological) in my position. Sometimes I *do* personally disagree with what he's saying; other times, I just want to see if I (or he) can make sense of it. I find that, being completely unlike crow in every way I can compare our posts and reasons for posting, I understand exactly what he's doing.

Doesn't mean I have to like it. Nevertheless I rely on the "well, you aren't me and since you can't see things from my eyes, you can't possibly know whether I am right or wrong" argument personally, day-to-day. It is basically the argument that I use to live with the decisions I've made that has brought me to this point in my life, for better or worse. Probably, we could all learn something about ourselves, if we think about how often (or whether at all) we apply that argument (as a justification or otherwise).

I probably could have avoided a lot of headache if I had clarified something early on.

Humanity, on its own, cannot access Absolute Truth.

The religious experience, such that the term can be categorically applied and uses to describe experiences of the named historical figures, crow and myself truth be told, allows such access to happen.

I do believe it's important to distinguish here and not just out of semantics. The religious experience despite variations through time, people and place, IS a very large and very real aspect of human life. Regardless, it is well beyond the ddimensions of ordinary life. The experiences vary, from an experience of the whole system (taoism), to the voice of God and the Angels, to contact with the Dream time (Aboriginal Australia) and even the Rhythms and dances of Shiva in all things (a bit closer to Taoism than the others).

My last word on the topic:
What is important and the only thing actually worth discussing are the values that are shared. It can be accepted that they are not universal, objective and absolute while still holding them in high regard. I believe Westerners are really, really bad at this. It is as if they cannot have self affirmation without absolutist belief. Contrasted with Vedic traditions that believe all are expressions of the divine. The flip side is, that's part of what makes the West uunique in a way.

I understand exactly what he's doing.

What exactly is he doing?
I ask, because I'd like to know what I am doing.
Because I'm not really aware of doing anything.

Sorry just a nitpick here, that isnt true. We dont know anything about crow except what he himself says and does on this forum and other places on the internet.

We know that crow actually exists during this time period and have a contemporaneous record of his observations.

Anyway you got one of those pats (beaks?) on the head so I am sure you said something right.

Did you consider it was a genuine attempt at understanding? My own history with crow hasn't been one of bunnies and roses...

Dont read too much into that comment Wild, I am not denigrating your understanding, it is just that I constantly see this pattern repeated. Say something that pleases the feathered one and you receive platitudes delivered in a tone of surprise (Wow! An actual intelligent being?!). On top of that there are often unwarranted assumptions made about posters (not talking about myself) and their appreciation, as demonstrated in this thread. It smacks of patronization to me, not that there is anything wrong with that, but the overall picture is one of partial engagement and mostly dismissal.

My own stance has gone from appreciation to concern and finally to compromise. I often find valuable expression in crow`s posts, but the content has never been anything unique and the rest of the package does not fit with greatness to my eyes. This forum is one of the few places where you can get away with saying you are basically the Buddha and have it taken at face value. I dont find it ridiculous or even unbelievable, just misplaced. It is whether such a personality should be the admin of a metal forum that draws my practical concern.

Edit: I am surprised you like that hipster witch-house stuff indjaseemun, it is pretty much what grimes is (try and catch people wearing death metal / black metal t-shirts ironically in her videos for a bit of distraction ;) )

I understand exactly what he's doing.

What exactly is he doing?
I ask, because I'd like to know what I am doing.
Because I'm not really aware of doing anything.

Christ on a cross, that's a lot to ask of someone, to describe what you are doing, on purpose or otherwise. If I keep practicing this kind of thing, I might make a succesful sports commentator (John Madden, look out!) But, I did say "exactly", so you are owed an explanation. I'd say (if pressed) you are moderating a forum rife with with holligans and rejects. That takes some balls and patience. Probably more than I have (of either). In my experience, such level of testicular fortitude is enviable. As they say in places far-off, "good on ya".

Beyond that (mundane a task as it may seem) you are offering us a chance to confront our own personal limits of trust. That is saying something, considering the general level of uptightness and psychological fortressing that many of us here are prone to. Maybe it means more to myself, personally, but being as I am (one who finds meaning and excitement in intense opposition), you do much for me by forcing me to confront my own barriers and poitentials through such intellectual stimulation. Probably you do the same for others (unconsciously or otherwise) whether on purpose or coincidentally. I would say through yourr arguments (or lack thereof) we find out more about our prejudice and willingness to accept that which we don't understand.

At the risk of being accused of sucking up for brownie points (a fair risk, considering how I never thought of myself as a kindred avian spirit), I identify with crow on the level brought up here in this thread; I know why crow *can not* be argued with, on a level that goes beyond the distinction between the "subjective vs. Objective" argument. Some things can only be defined through experience; something that I have attained that none of you ever will (and vice-versa), which you have to keep in mind if you want to get anything out of crow's wisdom (if you can bend your mind far enough to call it that!).

Fortunately, probably as a direct result of my most recent brush with death, I am not very pone to take myself so seriously as I once did. This is likely to be a phenomenon that is comparable to a snowball rolling down a mountain.
I am already a myth, and likely to become ever more so, and golly, maybe that is how one attains legendary status...

Flap flap flap...