Fractals and Buddhism

[DwayneHoover]

dude... you're making such a basic fallacy it's boggling me. and you just did it again.
....

Good post but dont waste your time. IsMean seems to revel in reactions to his obstinate insistence on missing the point of things people say or ask about his remarks, which all seem to begin the cycle by being critical or "debunking" of nearly everything in PD. I wont speculate on motives... perhaps he has none, is just speaking his mind and thats the way he thinks, and he's not really being negative all the time out of crankery or trollism. I give him the benefit of the doubt as he does sound sincere. Just what he's like but not worth arguing with because he NEVER cedes anything.

(hows that for a passive/aggressive remark? I've been practicing. )

 

[Solipsis]

I can only wonder how I come to frequent this board for a few years and never having had that issue. [with him I meant by the way]

If you can dialectically follow an analysis then let PD be your place for it, but if not then cease and desist. There is absolutely no point in returning unless you are hardlining principles, if you go on you are only torturing yourself. If you never go on though, you may run some other risks but that's a different topic. The heart must go on... (quote: Celine Dion, philosopher)

 

[DwayneHoover]

^ Cryptic. Oh.. looking at your Magritte Avatar I should have expected such. Strike that... reverse it... I meant: Perfection. %)

 

[nopipesdfw]

If they behaved like bloodthirsty maniacs then yes, clearly that's obvious.

Especially when those actions are totally irrelevant to the fundamental tenets of the belief set

Yeah but that's the key isn't it. You judge someone on what they actually do rather than what they say.

Just gonna say the original visions upon which all religions are founded on after wards don't change when crazy people climb power hierarchies called religion in this case and fuck shit up for a bunch of people... it happens.

 

[Ismene]

dude... you're making such a basic fallacy it's boggling me. and you just did it again.

the point is that they don't all behave like bloodthirsty maniacs, and it's clearly fallacious to induce the actions of everyone in a group based on the actions of some in a group when what defines the group isn't relevant to those actions.

You don't seem to be getting the point. Presumably you accept the fact that when buddhist masters had the chance to create a society they created a feudal system based on exploitation and brutalisation of slaves. This wasn't one bad Buddhist in one temple - it was the system they created throughtout the whole of Tibet and which they ran for hundreds of years.

Are you saying that didn't happen? That is was just one bad buddhist temple and the rest all treated the Tibetans with loving-kindness? Sounds pretty unlikely to me but hey, if you want to believe it then fine knock yourself out.



It's like saying that because a large group of black people are criminals that all black people are criminals, or rather, that "blackness" is criminal. it's disgusting and outright fallacious.

No, it's nothing like saying that whatsoever. You've completely missed the point. The Buddhists had power in Tibet for hundreds of years. Why didn't they follow Buddhist principles and treat everyone with loving-kindness? Surely if Buddhism actually means anything then when you have power you use it?

no, what a bunch of buddhists did is really not relevant to buddhism

So your argument is forget the thousand years of tibetan buddhists and the Dalai Lama, they were a bunch of cruel, despotic arseholes. Look to the OTHER buddhists? They would have treated everyone fine would they?

 

[Ismene]

Just gonna say the original visions upon which all religions are founded on after wards don't change when crazy people climb power hierarchies called religion in this case and fuck shit up for a bunch of people... it happens.

I suppose the question is how you know the orginal vision were dreamt up by people any better than the people who followed them. After all, it never crossed the mind of any of the Dala Lamas to go "Hey, you know what? Lets give the Tibetans some of our gold and food. And don't worry if they pinch a goat from us - after all - we arn't attached to possessions are we".

 

[Ismene]

Good post but dont waste your time. IsMean seems to revel in reactions to his obstinate insistence on missing the point of things people say or ask about his remarks, which all seem to begin the cycle by being critical or "debunking" of nearly everything in PD. I wont speculate on motives... perhaps he has none, is just speaking his mind and thats the way he thinks, and he's not really being negative all the time out of crankery or trollism. I give him the benefit of the doubt as he does sound sincere. Just what he's like but not worth arguing with because he NEVER cedes anything.

(hows that for a passive/aggressive remark? I've been practicing. )

Tell the truth Dwayne. This all came about because I wouldn't agree with you about ego-death. You've never forgiven me and will presumably follow me around threads for the rest of your life trying to get your own back.

Hey - why not have an ego-death soon? That way you won't be so upset that someone dared to disagree with you :D

 

[Shambles]

Fractals are the shit. The point some previous fella made about psyches/fractals/inifinity is made of win. Buddhism is neither here nor there really. Some Buddhists are wankers. Some aren't. All are fractal either way.

 

[Thorns Have Roses]

I suppose the question is how you know the orginal vision were dreamt up by people any better than the people who followed them. After all, it never crossed the mind of any of the Dala Lamas to go "Hey, you know what? Lets give the Tibetans some of our gold and food. And don't worry if they pinch a goat from us - after all - we arn't attached to possessions are we".

This statement implies all Lamas went out of their way to be cruel and despotic, that's not any more the case than all Catholic priests secretly being child molesters. I can appreciate your trying to bust some chops and shake up preconceptions, and lord knows Buddhism gets a free pass around here more often than most other religions, but your critiques have become vitriolic and inadequately evinced. Say your piece, then step away, hope to provoke thought. Don't stick around and surely create ill-will and anger.

What do you hope to accomplish by engaging in a shouting contest with Dwayne? It's best if you just cite some reliable sources and books on the subject, and implore the audience to seek them out as perspective providing information.

 

[IamMe90]

So your argument is forget the thousand years of tibetan buddhists and the Dalai Lama, they were a bunch of cruel, despotic arseholes. Look to the OTHER buddhists? They would have treated everyone fine would they?

This pretty much sums up your argument so I'll just respond to this.

No, the argument is not to forget anything bad Buddhists have done. The point is to condemn those actions themselves, and the people who committed them, without cultivating prejudice in the present. If Buddhists monks had been cruel to Tibetans in the past, condemn that cruelty and condemn the Buddhists who did it. But don't condemn current Buddhists and their beliefs before they even do anything wrong. It's ridiculous.

 

[Thorns Have Roses]

Condemning people who committed bad actions creates ill will, I think we should reserve our ire for their actions, as well as the system that was in place to create such people.

 

[Shambles]

In vaguely related news, just been watching a documentary about Buddhist art. Fractals may be found therein. Amongst other stuff.

 

[pewtergod]

The world is still a feudalistic society. Nothing has changed. The few still work for the many. The world is still a plutocracy, and a few buddhist ideals were certainly not going to change that. Nor were the Moaists.
Tibetan Buddhism only vaguely resembles Theravada buddhism, the closest thing we have to what the Buddha actually taught.
One thing he definitely taught, though, was that to find the truth, you must discard all beliefs. The truth cannot be come upon by a mind that thinks it already knows. It cannot be come upon by a mind seeking some special state. Belief and disbelief are both equally useless at arriving at truth. Disbelief is just another assumption by someone who doesn't know.
By the truth, I mean direct perception of the world as it is, without the usual filters we apply to it. Not the answer to quantum loop gravity or something. Normally the process we refer to as the self filters reality. We see everything from a point of view. But the self is just a process, the brain's present reaction to the world through all the conditioning it has accumulated over time.

 

[pewtergod]

Anyone who thinks they are going to find enlightenment or whatever following some teacher, buddhist or whatever, is in for a lifetime of disillusionment. They are seeking some special state to take their pain away. Yet it is the very pain they seek to escape that holds the key. The Buddha wasn't trying to find enlightenment. He saw a world full of pain, and was motivated by compassion to try to do something about it.

 

[IamMe90]

Anyone who thinks they are going to find enlightenment or whatever following some teacher, buddhist or whatever, is in for a lifetime of disillusionment. They are seeking some special state to take their pain away. Yet it is the very pain they seek to escape that holds the key. The Buddha wasn't trying to find enlightenment. He saw a world full of pain, and was motivated by compassion to try to do something about it.

truly seeking to perceive reality in itself and retaining the knowledge of that perception (this is key) is nigh impossible. part of the "filters" we apply to reality include integrating and understanding what we perceive. reality "in itself," although unknowable, is probably a chaotic mess of sensory input. of course, there is an argument that perception in itself clouds reality in itself, which is independent of perception.

 

[nopipesdfw]

Anyone who thinks they are going to find enlightenment or whatever following some teacher, buddhist or whatever, is in for a lifetime of disillusionment. They are seeking some special state to take their pain away. Yet it is the very pain they seek to escape that holds the key. The Buddha wasn't trying to find enlightenment. He saw a world full of pain, and was motivated by compassion to try to do something about it.

Completely agreed, don't make a permanent starting place for your state of mind or put all of your unconditional trust into one concept or person. Constructed, personal, and relative trust to whatever attributed by experience that is still malleable in standards upon changes over time is how to really learn.

EDIT:

I should add that I don't really think that enlightenment is something that you reach like heaven forever in an Abrahamic sense, that is some big bullshit in my book! I believe enlightenment is just pieces of relevant information to each individual that once understood further and deeper over time can greatly improve ones life and state of mind for now and later through conscious effort and maintenance along with constant attempt at ascension in all aspects of rounding and gaining both ways with the universe. I can't stand the insane screaming apocalypse self professed "chosen/enlightened/indigo" ones that shove TEH TRUTH down peoples mouths, because come on, to anybody who hasn't experienced some strange (and who the hell knows the vaildity of it) stuff it is by default already crazy sounding shit lol.

I suppose the question is how you know the orginal vision were dreamt up by people any better than the people who followed them.

Besides a shitload of agreed accounts throughout different philosophies and religions on him in the East, I don't, who knows how everything really went down.

Advice that is relevant by experience is something I always try to round and integrate into my intuition and will (From religious or philosophical texts or not), my interests in concepts from eastern religions is for me, not to show myself giving props to somebody else hoping for a present... gotta say fuck that to that.

 

[pewtergod]

Chaos seems to have gotten a bad name, rather like anarchist. When the brain can't pigeonhole it into it's little belief system. it is chaos. But chaos theory has shown us that apparent chaos is just a deeper level of complexity than our models could Handle. Yes, we see the color red instead of an oscillating electromagnetic field, but there is something basic to consciousness that is as fundamental as mass and energy. There can be no retaining of the knowledge of perception, for that is just grasping the past. Ask yourself, what do you love, and what are you willing to sacrifice for it. All other questions are just distractions.

 

[IamMe90]

Chaos seems to have gotten a bad name, rather like anarchist. When the brain can't pigeonhole it into it's little belief system. it is chaos. But chaos theory has shown us that apparent chaos is just a deeper level of complexity than our models could Handle.

that's a dangerous assumption to make, especially because things like "models" are part of the inherent filters in our minds. who knows if the concept of "model" has any place in an unperceived universe?

Yes, we see the color red instead of an oscillating electromagnetic field, but there is something basic to consciousness that is as fundamental as mass and energy. There can be no retaining of the knowledge of perception, for that is just grasping the past.

I don't buy this, there is definitely "knowledge" of perception, at least practical knowledge. Are you saying the entire field of phenomenology is totally false? Or
fake?" Perhaps "complete" knowledge of perception can't ever be attained but I don't understand how partial knowledge of perception can't be retained.

Ask yourself, what do you love, and what are you willing to sacrifice for it. All other questions are just distractions.

I have no idea what the basis for this is or why I should believe thse are the only questions that matter. People need to stop throwing out subjective, value-based assertions as axiomatic truths because they aren't.

 

[DwayneHoover]

^ Brilliant remarks, Pewtergod... great to see you here! Welcome to Bluelight! You are so good at being concise and focused and to the point, sentences like arrows, haha!

I have nothing to add really, except - great point about looking more to examples of Theravada Buddhism than the Tibetan strain. Yes the Tibetans, with all their fantastic art and music and pageantry are probably the most obvious visible examples on the world stage, but remember that mixed in with what The Buddha taught were alot of colors and elements etc. that came from more archaic Tibetan pagan culture. "True" Buddhism is about the teachings and even more-so, what you do with them and is purely a philosophy and practice of the mind and heart within one single individual being sitting alone. It has nothing to do with systems of government and "Lamas" and huge organized systems of temples and schools and their worldly hierarchies and offshoots.

So discussing what this or that Buddhist school/system did here or there is really, well, neither here nor there, haha (like The Buddha) :D

 

[DwayneHoover]

I have no idea what the basis for this is or why I should believe thse are the only questions that matter. People need to stop throwing out subjective, value-based assertions as axiomatic truths because they aren't.

Oh come now, sweetheart... dont say "people need to stop, etc etc" Discussion forums are ALL ABOUT people throwing out subjective value-based assertions, they're places for people to air their thoughts, feelings and opinions... this is not some formal philosophical journal/treatise or whatever. I think you might want to scale back your presumptions about what is going here. I don't think people feel what they are saying are "hardcore axiomatic assertions"... just on ongoing chat, OK? No one is trying to beat you over the head, I don't think, just have a friendly little hobnob, right? Or as Joker said in "Dark Knight", perhaps my favorite moment... "Why So Serious?" haha!