--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" <anartaxius@> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Vaj belives that if a lie is repeated often enough it becomes > > > > > a truth. Bless his "Buddhist" heart. > > > > > > > > That is a wonderful insight. We repeat the lie of separation > > > > over and over again, over so many years. One day we wake up > > > > laughing, no longer seeing the lie. The lie is the pathway to > > > > truth, life is the deepest teacher. We repeatedly bang our > > > > head against the wall, but that cannot last. The wall banging > > > > comes to a stop. The lie cannot survive, it just takes some > > > > intense living of the lie for it to shrivel naturally from > > > > its own lack of foundation. > > > > > > Non sequitur and whopping category error. > > > > > > FAIL. > > > > I do not think tartbrain was taking a test for receiving > > a grade. > > I do not think I suggested that he was. > > > His response may be a non sequitur. (You will have to explain > > to me the category error Judy, as I have trouble with > > categories these days.) > > I may have to take back I said in my previous post > about your not *trying* to be obnoxious, O > Categoryless Wonder. > > It would be a category error if tartbrain intended it > to be taken as a relevant response to what Nabby said, > which appears to have been the case. Nabby was not, of > course, talking about the unfolding of enlightenment > but about Vaj's belief concerning deliberate > misstatements of fact.
That is correct. > > tartbrain's little "insight" would have been fine on > its own terms in, say, a separate post. > > Classic example of a category mistake: after touring the > campus of Harvard, you look at all the buildings and > facilities and ask, But where is the university? > > > You have a very linear, logical mind, I think I used to > > be that way. > > O Lord of Alogical Nonlinearity, I bow down. > > > Your mind is too tightly focused sometimes. > > Yes, I know logic and focus seem to make some people > uncomfortable. If they're too much for you, might I > suggest that you not read my posts? No Judy, I will continue to read some of your posts. It might be that tartbrain is actually experiencing the world in terms of a single category; this is what the word 'boundless' refers to in terms of consciousness in spiritual parlance. The distinctions which are significant to you may not seem important to him. In unity the universe is a single category in which all things are related. So the connexion he made would be valuable for someone reading this, but not everyone, and apparently not you. But strictly logically as an answer to Nabby's comment, you are right. I am not deliberately attempting to be obnoxious, but you do seem to see that value and others frequently as a characteristic of those with whom you are having a discussion or skirmish. Just remember that such evaluations when we have them, when we hold them, exist only in our own heads, not in the world about us, and thus are a reflection of our own state of mind. Thank you for the example of a category mistake. Made me look the term up. It seems to have been invented after I was born. >From Wikipedia: 'The term "category-mistake" was introduced by Gilbert Ryle in his book The Concept of Mind (1949) to remove what he argued to be a confusion over the nature of mind born from Cartesian metaphysics. Ryle alleged that it was a mistake to treat the mind as an object made of an immaterial substance because predications of substance are not meaningful for a collection of dispositions and capacities.'
