--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" <emptybill@...> wrote: > > > Last time we went down this path I gave you a summary of Yogic Vedanta's > definitions of "states" of unity consciousness. I did this > because I doubted that you had access to the source material. It took me > a lot of time because I work slowly, carefully and with continual > measurement of the way we know what we know. > > > This time is ain't necessarily so. > > Go read the discussions in the Meno between Socrates and the slave boy > on recollection and innate knowledge. Then read his statements about > mere opinion, true opinion and knowledge.
Thank you. I do like books. And I appreciate your past references. Some of which I found of great value. However, I also like to go beyond book learning and understand things experientially, in ways that affect and nurture my living of life. My question was innocent, the direction perhaps not clear. I will restate, for my own value, I assume that you may punt (which is fine). In your day to day, real world living, outside of the domain of books, pure intellectual frameworks, and quoting of lofty sages, when do YOU (not plato, socrotes, shankara or any number of wise people) know that something is absolutely true, and not simply a byproduct of the way your mind, samskaras (roasted or not), culture, personal experience, biases (known and unknown), projection, wish fulfillment, hopin' and prayin' (and more crazy stuff that distorts our take on how things are) -- that I (perhaps crudely) lump together and term "opinion". Some people claim a state that is irrefutably true, self-validating, and obvious. however, when the same claim flimsy, secondhand knowledge which is clearly not valid, well research or thought through as "irrefutable", I tend to go back to the null hypothesis -- even in lofty spiritual matters, that ultimately its all "opinion" -- in the sense state above -- that is we see things through our own glasses and there is no such thing as an absolutely clear lens (unless you are Krishna or somebody -- I use Krishna as a metaphor for the perfect, flawless instrument (nervous system) to see things as they really are) -- and since I only know glimpses of Krishna, through my own distorted lens (I may be seeing nothing at all in reality) how could I possibly know what he knows and perceives.) If you can share how you personally have disproved the null hypothesis, I would be all ears. If you think you know how others did it, Socrotes, Shankara and who ever, thats interesting. But not to my point -- and while of some interest, is not the object of my full interest and attention at the moment. > .. > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" emptybill@ wrote: > > > > > > Who the "fucking hell" cares what you have to say about this? > > > Go talk to Bariatric-I whose opinion is that everything is opinion. > > > > To hold that there is something other than opinion implies you know > something that is absolutely true. Can you share? > > >
