Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Imposition

1 ... 3 [4] 5 ... 14
46
Metal / Re: Ildjarn bandcamp
« on: February 18, 2014, 07:05:42 AM »
Do you mean the music, the words or both?

The music

47
Metal / Re: Ildjarn bandcamp
« on: February 18, 2014, 04:24:58 AM »
Ildjarn remains similar in appearance, to my sensibilities, to the rantings of an idiot-savant.

But that it just me.

48
Interzone / Re: The way things are - The way things ought to be
« on: February 18, 2014, 04:11:58 AM »
You are on your way to killing the consumer inside you.
Congrats :)

To practice meditation to the point where you can take this mindset around with you - while you are active (i.e. getting buses, driving, walking in city)...

Now that would be ideal. Sometimes it happens. Rarely.

49
Interzone / Re: The way things are - The way things ought to be
« on: February 18, 2014, 04:09:22 AM »
You know what else is overrated? Science. Seems like the more people attempt to explain and hypothesize everything, the further they get from experiencing anything and, hence, knowing anything. Seems like a lot of effort to do a bunch of insane stuff. I think that humans "know" way too much nowadays in general. Information overload. I say stop analyzing everything; it is best to know what is necessary in order to live successfully, and no more.

If it wasn't for the science you deride, you wouldn't be able to have the time, equipment, and safety/comfort to enjoy a piece of Bach's, or a zen session. So you're experiences would be limited. So perhaps things balance out in the end, hey?

This is the exact type of response that I anticipated, haha :P I suppose that my statements seem spoiled and ignorant to you? I was generalizing, anyway.

Then I am glad i did not disappoint!

Not spoiled, just slightly too dismissive of modernity, in my opinion.

Nothing is as black and white as it first appears.

50
Interzone / Re: The way things are - The way things ought to be
« on: February 18, 2014, 04:06:33 AM »
Aha :)
Now there's a seriously good idea.
Better yet: save it only for special occasions, where you can give it your whole attention, and forego the rest.

I sometimes think the same. I listen too much, and have switched to podcasts a bit more instead. I prefer even more to play music with other people - but this is nearly impossibly as of late due to circumstances.

Also, I feel like posting to the 'band you are listening to today' thread in the metal boards more, but then think, this isn't a kill tally.

51
Interzone / Re: The way things are - The way things ought to be
« on: February 18, 2014, 03:27:36 AM »
You know what else is overrated? Science. Seems like the more people attempt to explain and hypothesize everything, the further they get from experiencing anything and, hence, knowing anything. Seems like a lot of effort to do a bunch of insane stuff. I think that humans "know" way too much nowadays in general. Information overload. I say stop analyzing everything; it is best to know what is necessary in order to live successfully, and no more.

If it wasn't for the science you deride, you wouldn't be able to have the time, equipment, and safety/comfort to enjoy a piece of Bach's, or a zen session. So you're experiences would be limited. So perhaps things balance out in the end, hey?

52
Interzone / Re: The way things are - The way things ought to be
« on: February 18, 2014, 02:05:10 AM »
No. None of that rings any bells. But I see, as usual, science desperately trying to get something it probably has almost no hope of understanding, down to a 'pat' little formula. Science is famous for this.

 ;) Science has raised many more questions than it has answered, for me.

This would be my way of characterizing the feeling, without 'processing' it verbally. Maybe you will appreciate this attempt!

http://youtu.be/tmpxXq3Gx9w?t=6m11s

53
Interzone / Re: The way things are - The way things ought to be
« on: February 18, 2014, 01:49:57 AM »
No, that's fine. But that is nothing like the way things are for me.
I know when I am thinking. I see thoughts. Hear them.
Thus I notice, easily enough, their absence.
What is abundantly clear to me, now, after years of writing about all of this, is that pretty much nobody has any idea of what I am talking about. Some are able to take it at face value and leave it alone, but those are few.

I cannot argue with your experiences. Descartes understood why this is so.

This is not meant to debunk your views, I am thinking perhaps you might be synesthesic?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synesthesia

54
Interzone / Re: The way things are - The way things ought to be
« on: February 18, 2014, 01:47:26 AM »
You're missing the objective judgement of what is good and what is right because no human possesses the faculty to make such a call.

By what authority do you claim to know what all humans are capable or not capable of?
This is one of those examples of how one human judges the capabilities of all humans by what he, himself, is capable or not capable of.

On the authority that no human ever has produced a definite statement of absolute truth with regards to objective right and wrong.

Beyond that. Humans lack the perspective to see the full range of effects which radiate from every action as well as the effects that affect those actions. We can't even recall every moment our short lives.

It's only the hubris of the modern era that allows for the suggestion that everything can be reduced to level that it can be grasped by the human intellect. Or maybe it's more accurate to say that we believe the human intellect is so powerful that it can grasp everything.

Careful, my friend, in all good spirits, be careful.

There is a sense in which the 'modern era' is more humble than other eras. In older times, people thought they would pass judgement over the entire cosmos, it's origins, it's purpose and its operation.

Now, we understand sources of human fallibility, and we construct systems of knowledge that make corrections for this (peer review, experimental standards, and so on). We admit doubt, and by doing so, learn more.

And this relates to our other discussion: the failure to mitigate environmental damage is not the fault of modern 'knowledge' - in the sense of a set of ontological beliefs about the cosmos - it is the fault of human willpower, political structures, moral 'knowledge' and psychological denial. Only 'enlightened' humanity will survive through its environmental crisis - using technology and know-how. Or we will perish.

55
Interzone / Re: The way things are - The way things ought to be
« on: February 18, 2014, 01:30:51 AM »
Try looking at what you, and nearly everybody else does, as processing.
What is processing, anyway?
You take something - in the raw - and change it into something else. Usually for ease, or convenience. You do this via desire. Desire for a result that the original thing does not seem to supply. Think Kraft Cheese Slices. It bears very little resemblance to actual cheese. And that is what happens with mental processing. You end up with an understanding based upon what you have done to the original data, but not the original data, itself.
My one point is this:
Suspending intellect, you get a clear picture of things as things are, rather than what you have turned them into, by processing them. This I learned from a crow.
Call it intuition, or instinct, or whatever you feel comes closest. But whatever it is, it isn't intellect.
We are taught, early on, to process everything and subject it to intellect.
But what is the consequence of that?
Eh?

Hmmm, but even the very simple act of perceiving something (like a crow), even before all processing, as you call it, is changing it from something that it is (particles, and their properties organised in a specific way to produce crow-behaviour) to something that it is not (light waves - and then, electrical signals in our brains).

I think the only way we come to know that this is the case, is via what you're calling 'processing': higher-level, analytical thought!

So by suspending intellect, we do not get a clearer picture of what things really are like, we are, as Plato would have thought, deceived. (And weren't you using analytic processing to get across your own point just now?) I know you're not going to like this, and it is not meant to challenge your worldview, as much to offer my own.

There is of course a big danger is being too analytic, and too intellectual. But what makes us special is that we can switch between these modes, when each is appropriate. When you look at a crow, or the stars, or a beautiful naked woman, you don't want to be thinking analytically all the time. But when it comes to knowing 'things-in-themselves' - then we don our Newton, Einstein, Watson or Crick hats and bow to the mystery (and then sometimes this forces you to stop thinking analytically - for sometimes it is too incredible to put 2 and 2 together and think of yourself as a manifestation of charges and particles. Sometimes you just need to sit and exist without-thinking).

56
Interzone / Re: Atheism
« on: February 18, 2014, 01:14:24 AM »
There is a distinction, Imposition, between the categorical definition of Atheism and the ideologies of Ages of Rationalism that are categorically atheist.

Agreed!


I said Progress no longer fits reality. Big distinction.

You misunderstood my comments on science so I can't really address any more of what you wrote.

Is the idea something like this: progress doesn't fit reality because progress is leading to environmental destruction? Is the difference this: i was talking about the accuracy of scientific statements and their ability to refer to things in the world, where you were talking about the consequences of science - down the track?

57
Interzone / Re: Atheism
« on: January 30, 2014, 01:53:06 AM »
I find people interesting, and their beliefs interesting. If we don't agree at least we can understand why we don't, which is more than most substantial debates in polite society achieve.

I think it's pretty obvious that the core ideology of modern atheism, Progress, no longer fits reality.

If you would like to keep the conservation going (as I personally would rather discuss cool, big picture stuff like this than other topics), you are going to have to explain this to me.

Atheism, I would have thought, is simply the belief that the God of theism (a supernatural agent/person) does not exist. It might also include the belief that reality is better explained via physicalism. The evangelical endeavors of the 'new-atheist' movement is its own thing. 'Progress' is vague ideological trapping that gets associated with atheism - due to proximity rather than the conceptual meaning of 'atheism'.

Both of these beliefs (a-theism, physicalism) are better born out by the success of science/naturalistic philosophy than their opposites (supernaturalism/dualism)... so how does atheism no longer fit with reality? I would have though theism no longer fits reality, from the perspective of true beliefs.

I throw heavily into question the greater ontology/cosmology that modern science has wrought simply due to the unshaken foundations I mentioned earlier that have their origins in Christendumb. Again a lot of that has to do with my understanding of the patterns of thought throughout recorded history.

Are you saying that physics is wrong because the origins of science is in finding laws of nature (which is attached to Christianity, in some vague sense)?!

And how, on earth, can it be sensible to question the ontology of modern science? As i tried to point out before, we aren't using computers, stereos, telescopes, airoplanes, medicine, etc because physical/chemical/biological 'laws' (or regularities of greater enough stability/range) in nature aren't there! We're using them all because they are!

let me know if I've misinterpreted your comments.

58
Metal / Re: Tormention
« on: January 29, 2014, 02:36:49 PM »
They aren't bad at stringing a coherent song together compared with others. A use of harmony sometimes too to keep a section going. However very choppy and bouncy rhythms, and the aesthetics aren't what I like. There is too much in-your-face-ness.

It is a pity much modern metal (influenced by modern hardcore?) uses violent symbolism in a purely macho way nowadays - without any poetic/mythic overtones. It has no context and thus translates into a rather wigger-like, aggressive, urban vibe - in this case penned by some fat guy with a mic who, one presumes, may be compensating for confidence issues. The clip is terrible.

59
Interzone / Re: Accidentally vegan
« on: January 29, 2014, 02:27:39 PM »
Did you make an account just to talk about veganism?

Haha, I think you will find that is Mr Stevens.

60
Interzone / Re: Atheism
« on: January 29, 2014, 08:24:39 AM »
My concern with correctness is not just for its own sake, which is what I was trying to get at in my last post. It's for the sake of realism (in a practical sense). Atheism coheres with so many other beliefs (related to the creation of technology, exploration, and science) that I think it is here to stay. Correctness? Let's talk about reality, or presence, then. Atheism is present.

How do we deal with it, improve upon it, make it, yes... sacred?

This is probably why I'm drawn more towards listening to death metal these days, and not black metal. There is a real sense of making physicalism/nihilism meaningful there... while black metal is more mythical and traditionalist.

Eastern religions might have made more progress in making a form of monistic a-theism sacred, in a sense.


1 ... 3 [4] 5 ... 14