--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@...> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > Thanks for getting this ball rolling - > > I think you get that credit. > > > one more thing I want to add, is a response to the challenge, "How do I know > that my world view is correct?" > > > > Simple answer, I don't. However, I base my conclusions on my own > > experience.> > > Sounds honest and I can relate. We all do the best we can, especially in the > area of discussing ultimate reality. > > > <So far, the path I have chosen, has rewarded me incomprehensibly in terms > of inner fulfillment and outer success. I consider both areas an excellent > mirror of what is, and is not, working for me.> > > Neuro Linguistic Programming (NLP) has an interesting distinctions between > useful and un-useful beliefs.I am not the epistemological relativist they > are, but I think it relates to your position. It is sort of epistemology by > utility and I can relate to its pragmatism. But I am a bit more of an > idealist in that I believe we can do better in our beliefs. It all starts > for me, with weeding out the ones that lack good support.
**As I mentioned, my actions are not based on a set of beliefs. I do the best I can, based on info presented to me. By the same token, I don't let beliefs cloud my view of how I am doing, right now. If I am hungry, I eat. If I need to reflect on something that I want to improve next time, same thing. It doesn't have to be a big deal. Then there are the obvious indicators - Am I comfortable, physically, financially, socially, intimately, and emotionally? Is life in its essence, here on Planet Earth, working, or do I tell myself one thing, and do another, or think another? Other than that, there are no beliefs to stand in the way of what I do next. > > > > > On that basis, I verify my path, the things I express, and the values that > > I hold, day by day. The consistency with which I express my ideas, is > > simply based on repeated experience, vs. belief. It may look like the same > > thing when expressed, but it isn't. No spider webs in my head.:-) > > > I'll answer your other post below as it relates to the above statements. It > starts with my assumption that you are not using a fundamentally different > cognitive mechanism than I am. I believe we are both bound by the same > constraints concerning how our experiences are shaped by beliefs. **Nope. The cognitive part I agree with, but getting me to say I form my experiences on the basis of belief is BS. Maybe true for you, but not me. It slows me down waaaaaay too much. > > <Hi Curtis, I did not say anything about beliefs, or use that word in my > response. If atheism is merely an absence of the *belief* in God, that is a > very positive thing. God is an ongoing journey, not a being described with > static values, that are then pitted against us, by comparison. > > I will argue that our experience is always shaped by beliefs, conscious or > unconscious. **What is the unconscious? Please give me an example of its operation. If we are witnessing experience 24/7, how is unconscious even possible?? We do not report, or even think about pure experience, we filter it through our language choices. And this is where our world view, which is actually a web of beliefs, imposes itself on our ineffable experiences. I think you are making a distinction about conscious beliefs which are a tiny part of our belief web, structuring and shaping all of our perceptions, even of ourselves and mostly beyond our conscious control. **Yeah, again, you must provide an example here. This ooga booga unconsciousness I don't know about. Even when I am asleep I have self-awareness. So I don't know what it is I should be facing, according to you, when there are no more shadows in my awareness. Expansion to discover, of course. These unconscious shadows, no. **Also, we do have bodily functions beyond our conscious control. That's kind of a no-brainer. There is an obvious hierarchy for our body intelligence. I personally do not want to consciously regulate the near infinite transmission of chemicals and fluids throughout my body. Seems to operate just fine. **The only other area you could be discussing, in terms of the "unconscious", is emotions. This, I think has much more with forming a world view, than any beliefs one may be using as crutches. Simple as that. If a person is fundamentally struggling all of the time, and not meeting with success, they will not feel great. Their world view will be affected more by immediate circumstances and individual choices, than it ever will by their beliefs. **Beliefs are a way for the ego to sidestep authentic emotional confrontation, within ourselves. To look unflinchingly, silently into the mirror, and dealing with whatever reflects back has nothing to do with beliefs. It is about being instantly honest with ourselves. **That is where I am coming from. > <God is life, and love and infinity and everything else. All a coherent > expression of universal compassion.> > > > I am with you if you want to equate God with life itself rather than the > creator of life. **How do you see the two as different? Life itself is so wondrous that it deserves all the PR the idea of the creator usurped through men's imaginations. The added value of "compassion" seems to be an imposition of personification onto life. **It is not an imposition of personification on life. It IS life. Life is not some sterile value, which takes form. It takes form out of an active interest to explore and express itself. By showing compassion and boundless acceptance, it continues to grow and expand. As far as I can tell, this is a product of our lives as social primates, and doesn't play a big role in the vastness of life forms on the planet. I am a fan, but that is because I am human, not because there is a value of it existing beyond my human choices. **All of the creatures don't have media outlets, but they show compassion towards one another all of the time, though it is never reported. History is written by the victors. I don't know of one instance where one family of creatures, assembled and went to war, against another group of creatures, organized with the single intent of slaughter. Except for us humans. I don't think we can judge jack shit about compassion, using ourselves as an example. > > <This is all off the cuff - I have no beliefs about God, but rather describe > God in the moment, as He and She is experienced.> > > Even if you were able to experience him without any of the unconscious > filters of belief we now know human's process their experience through (which > I don't believe you can) as soon as you articulate it into any words you are > imposing your beliefs, meanings and values on the experience. **Not really. I am perfectly capable of expressing myself, without the crutch of belief. Meanings are in a different category, as they relate to useful interpretation of symbols - e.g. don't run the stop sign. Values are important components of personal expression, but, again do not need to be based on the roadblocks of belief. > And you are not the first to claim pure experience beyond belief as an > epistemological jiu jitsu move. The problem is everyone can claim this > including people whose pure experience you believe are full of it. You still > haven't addressed how you distinguish your pure experience of subjective > reality as more valid than the Moonies or Born Again Christians. Or maybe you > did by saying you don't know. **It is based on results. That's it. If someone wants to challenge me on that, OK. I don't care what a person believes, though. It is who they are, right now. **We began this as a question of whether or not we all function through the templates of our beliefs. You say of course, and I do not. It is possible, imo, but absolutely not a certainty. And the fact is that you cannot, no one can. It is the fundamental flaw in subjective knowledge about how the world is. You will never be challenged if you just apply it to your own sense of your self and don't make any statements about the reality of the world. **I lost you on this one. Everyone expresses their subjective reality. The goal, as I see it, is to operate with as little baggage as possible. With a lot of effort, study, reflection, and balls to the wall determination, it is definitely possible to remove the dressings of our beliefs, let them heal, and have a successful, happy, socially joyous, exciting and wonderful life, without them. **Perhaps you can show me how a disbelief in God has greatly benefited you, today, NOW. Like I said, beliefs are for the dead, the unconscious. > > <Any discussion on the basis of this belief, or that belief, is nonsense. Who > cares? Experience is the only thing worth discussing. Other than that, all > onedoes is make a case for a static thought, or as we so charmingly call it, > a belief. Beliefs are for dead people.> > > I experience thoughts and beliefs as subjective experiences. I am not sure > your distinction holds up. I believe you are denying one of our most valued > human capacities here by putting down beliefs. I get it that it is part of > the move to make your subjective beliefs about your internal experiences seem > more than that. But it denies one of our most charming human abilities: to > form beliefs based on what we can consider on reflection after the fact using > more of our pre frontal cognitive brain. You seem to be denying your own humanity as a being capable of basing beliefs on better or worse evidence. It is almost a regression to the concept of the "noble savage" who was touted to embody pure, unfiltered experience. That view just does not hold up with what we know about neurology now. Making a claim like this with the evidence about how our mind works we now have is poetic but uninformed. **That's just weird. A noble savage doesn't operate with success in the modern world, nor form comprehensive relationships with people all over the world. A very poor comparison, indeed. > > You seem to actually be saying that there is one class of internal experience > that can be trusted, even over later reflection on it. **What? Nope, never said it. Reflection and belief are not the same at all. Reflection gives a fuller view of what has occurred and the other is just roadblocks, mental poo. You are not the first and wont be the last to do so, but that ship has sailed with the rise of neurobiology, revealing that we are not as innocent in our internal experience as we believe. And perversely, we have another cognitive gap that makes us unreasonably confident about our interpretation of our subjective experiences. > > It is how the human monkey rolls. > **Just going by experience. I really don't think deciding that black is white, or up is down, is going to help me pay my taxes this year. Or help put my daughter through school, or tune up my car, or weed the yard. So, if you need the burden of belief to make your world go 'round, I accept that, but I don't need the extra weight, thanks. I am busy enough, without beliefs.
