What is "now"

[!!4iV4HF9R34g]

He's probably alluding to reading you and rangrz' posts hahahaha. Just didn't wanna hurt your feelings.

 

[rangrz]

Yes, my posts at 2-3 paragraphs, on topics like the treatment of time in modern physics, are overwhelmingly verbose.

Can you do better, given your profound grasp of the subject matter? Be my guest and condense general relativity more then I did. ( It may not be an end all answer to the question of now; but it is valid and important aspect to consider an empirical and scientific explanation in addition to your spiritual one.)

 

[Thorns Have Roses]

That is not an explanation. It is a four-word sentence that has as many meanings as there are words in the English language, which considerably dilutes its specificity and, thereby, its helpfulness, at least in my book.

Refer back to the hammer and the microscope. And Confucius.

If someone was overdosing on an opioid, would you prescribe Bacopa and say five prayers, or would you administer intravenous naloxone? Think about the implications of what you're suggesting here.

Where did I tell people not to visit an M.D. if they were ill or had a serious health issue? I even bothered to name some things that these systems can help with, and conspicuously left out medicine.

Okay, I agree with that much, so long as we confine the universe of discourse to literature, philosophy, etc.

You say that, but what do you do? You demand more words, more precision, that we limit ourselves to what can be dealt with in more formal logic. While we keep trying to say that that technique is not the only valid/useful method of conveying information through language, there are other forms of expression. Poetry, allegory, and aphorism have their place.

He's probably alluding to reading you and rangrz' posts hahahaha

Nah, they're pretty smart dudes, and do what they do much better than I ever could. My only issue with them is their monomania (could they say that about me? Maybe, I dunno, I think I can think like they do when the situation demands it, like in the focus forums). I was just giving background info, to help'em try to see that some folks will read Nausea, but not Being and Nothingness, and they can still talk about Sartre too.

In conclusion, you shouldn't just look at what is or isn't, you'll learn a lot if you could stop and smell the IS-ness.

 

[P A]

Where did I tell people not to visit an M.D. if they were ill or had a serious health issue?

You didn't. It was a counter-scenario that I conjured up on my own initiative to make a point; which point was intended as a reductio ad absurdum re. the whole 'alternative sources' comment to which you paid lip service in your post above. I think that such attitudes (avowed anti-psychiatry, etc.) are, on the whole, more harmful than helpful, more destructive than instructive, and are founded less upon sincere seeking than upon glib New Age sophistry lacking a clearly discernible basis.

Refer back to the hammer and the microscope. And Confucius.

Refer back to how tedious I find these insipid little parables and quotes.

You say that, but what do you do? You demand more words, more precision, that we limit ourselves to what can be dealt with in more formal logic.

Wrong. I was only saying that we shouldn't start doling out practical advice (like, e.g., the case of the OD) when said advice is founded upon myth and sophistry rather than the rigorous application of the scientific method. Color me crazy, but that's just how I see things.

I was just giving background info, to help'em try to see that some folks will read Nausea, but not Being and Nothingness, and they can still talk about Sartre too.

See, there it is again. If you had ever so much as casually perused any threads other than the ones in which I'm being alternately lambasted and defended by our frequent contributors, you'd know that I'm an avid reader of existentialist screeds and novels. [cf. my Nietzsche quote above re. confounding me, etc.] [also cf. my blog post entitled 'Reading List']

 

[Thorns Have Roses]

Refer back to how tedious I find these insipid little parables and quotes.

So you refuse to acknowledge that our words might have a point beyond a literal or otherwise straightforward interpretation, or try to gain a better understanding of them. Or better phrased, you refuse to engage anything beyond the words we use. You could have just said so to begin with.

Wrong. I was only saying that we shouldn't start doling out practical advice (like, e.g., the case of the OD) when said advice is founded upon myth and sophistry rather than the rigorous application of the scientific method. Color me crazy, but that's just how I see things.

Again, when I want to know what is technically correct and objectively true about the universe, I seek out scientific data. However, practically speaking (and I use the word differently than you), in terms of developing more desirable thought processes and personality traits, I resort to the systems man has honed over thousands of years for this purpose. I personally find them more effective than the contemporary and more scientific systems, which are an extension of the social system as much as legitimate therapy, or seem so in my dealings with them.

And I think it neither possible nor desirable to separate man and myth.

See, there it is again. If you had ever so much as casually perused any threads other than the ones in which I'm being alternately lambasted and defended by our frequent contributors, you'd know that I'm an avid reader of existentialist screeds and novels

I didn't say anything about existentialism, I merely used Sartre as an example because of our shared fondness for him. Though you don't think novels from philosophers represent some of that lyricism you find so bothersome? Okay, I assumed wrong then.

Since we're not going to arrive at an understanding, I will end with words of peace, a simple description of part of my walk tonight. It serves no particular purpose, nor is it well crafted, just a lil' stream of consciousness, qualitative fluff to stuff your pillow with:

NSFW:

Mood music
My mind was still, and things took on a bit of that special glow. On passing a fountain, I dipped my hand in the water and spread it across my face, from the forehead down, to feel the cool wetness. Continuing on I was soon confronted by Eucalyptus trees, seeing these at night, lit the by the street lights is always striking to me. They exist so intensely a touch of fear creeps into me, and their bark so smooth and white appears like bone or flesh. Next I grabbed a leaf of a coniferous tree, it smelled of sap rather than pine, amber like the soft glow of the street lights. The world was exposing itself to me in one of its more beautiful guises, but it felt odd without accompanied mental alteration...why should a church's bell tower be angled so, and touched with so unearthly a greenish light when my internal world is normal? I dispelled my malaise with the scent and feel of a lantana blossom I plucked. It's a delightful flower and I associate it very much with this time of year, I let go and the serenity of night drifted through me.

 

[P A]

So you refuse to acknowledge that our words might have a point beyond a literal or otherwise straightforward interpretation, or try to gain a better understanding of them. Or better phrased, you refuse to engage anything beyond the words we use. You could have just said so to begin with.

3. No incoherent posts. We understand that the subject matter discussed in P&S can sometimes be highly abstract and hard to put into words. We also accept that many people's thoughts here come to them during states of altered consciousness. English is not everyone's first language here, and even native English speakers vary in their ability to eloquently express a heady idea. However, if a sober moderator can make no sense of a post at all, he reserves the right to close or unapprove it.

Though you don't think novels from philosophers represent some of that lyricism you find so bothersome? Okay, I assumed wrong then.

Okay, see, but get this: P&S is not a novel, a poem collection, or an extended lyrical essay - it is a discussion board. That is not to say that I don't or won't permit these sorts of things (poetry, etc.) to exist here, but posting a cryptic poem, a quote, and a barely decipherable one-liner in response to a well-thought-out argument just doesn't cut it for me. [Please recall who started this conversation in the first place (Panic in Paradise) with his incessant bitching.]

 

[Mu-ham-mad]

The limitations of a sober moderator are not considered by rule 3, however.

 

[P A]

The limitations of a sober moderator are not considered by rule 3, however.

Perhaps not. But that's the rule, such as it is.

 

[Mu-ham-mad]

Do claims of being an "indigo child" make any sense whatsoever to a sober moderator?!

 

[P A]

Do claims of being an "indigo child" make any sense whatsoever to a sober moderator?!

Yes. But I reserve the opinion that such claims are baseless and, what's more, useless.

 

[Cyanoide]

When I say we as humans do not perceive "now" fully, it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. It doesn't mean "now" is without any meaning. The only thing I firmly believe is that we cannot experience "now" simply because our stimuli are unable to. We do feel like we experience the present. It's real for us. And for me that's what actually matters. We being unable to experience "now" is not something inherently negative, there's nothing wrong with it. No, the opposite; what we experience is what matters to us. It is not essential or even important to fully grasp the present. If we're a bit "late" is no big deal, what is much more important is how we react to and deal to the stimuli we are bombarded with.

However, that does not mean that there's any contradiction with my firm view that we are unable to experience now. The remaining question is if it's really important. I believe not.

 

[Heroic]

What is now? Don't know, just missed it.

 

[Mu-ham-mad]

Speed Levitch: "the ongoing wow is happening right now" (Waking Life - the film, that is!)

 

[alasdairm]

Do claims of being an "indigo child" make any sense whatsoever to a sober moderator?!

to add to what pa has said, bluelight gives a great deal of discretion to forum staff on the day to day running and general zeitgeist of their forums.

while there is a mechanism for handling claims of inappropriate behaviour by staff, you'll have to get used to the idea that the moderators' interpretation of the rules is the one that counts.

alasdair

 

[KamMoye]

It is equally funny and sad how much energy is wasted by people attempting to exert their interpretation of the world onto others.

 

[Mu-ham-mad]

It is equally funny and sad how much energy is wasted by people attempting to exert their interpretation of the world onto others.

How could we quantify this effect? Post-count, perhaps?

 

[KamMoye]

I am not sure you would want to quantify it.

Unless you are a masochist.

 

[P A]

How could we quantify this effect? Post-count, perhaps?

If we were going by post-count, you would certainly be a winner. Compare, say, my meager post count of .55 per day to yours: No fewer than 37 posts per day. Conversely, Kam, you come out somewhere in between at a solid 1.18, more than twice my count. And I'm a mod; I'm almost always online by necessity. Read between those lines.

It is equally funny and sad how much energy is wasted by KamMoye in his attempt to passive-aggressively propound his interpretation of what he reads to others.

 

[Mu-ham-mad]

Total energy = total number of posts!
You've calculated the effort per unit time; in which case - fair enough. I won't be able to keep this post-rate up for long--- As a sober moderator, you're also neglecting the fact that the effort that it takes me to make a post, may not be equal to the effort-required by a sober-poster.

 

[P A]

As a sober moderator, you're also neglecting the fact that the effort that it takes me to make a post, may not be equal to the effort-required by a sober-poster.

I confess that I am only sober ~50% of the time, so long as we operationally define 'sober' to mean 'temporally outside of the median dose-response/half-life curve for any intoxicants, sedatives, etc.,' hence the rarity of any actual moderation on my part.