In a message dated 2004:01:10 05:43:33 PM, [log in to unmask] writes: >Multiple people percieve the same object. In fact, one person will often >percieve the same object as other people. Would you perceive a black phallic object the same way a Hindu would? Dangerously loaded generalization _there_ that we all perceive things alike - one that Christophe might have something(s) to say about - being that he is quite scientific and has on a number of times pointed out how language itself creates a cultural bias becuz it creates a "cultural mindset" _and_ many types of "individual mindsets" Would you perceive a black phallic object the same way a Hindu would? In a message dated 2004:01:10 06:50:15 PM, [log in to unmask] writes: >Assuming that there is such a thing as "50 other >people." Since your perception of the existence of 50 >other people exists in your mind it could well be an >illusion. ... and even within an individual, there is no clear-cut logical consistency in neural responses to stimuli as both the individual perception and the brain is continually changing, adapting, learning, effected by diet, stresses, health - mental and otherwise, etc.. We are just not the same people we were just yesterday... In a message dated 2004:01:10 06:50:15 PM, [log in to unmask] writes: >What if you awoke for this dream you call reality and >discovered that it was inded a dream and that the 50 >other people you were dreaming of have no objective >reality? Paraphrasing heavily, ChuangTzu once said: I had a dream that I was a butterfly or I am a butterfly dreaming I am human dreaming I am a butterfly? In a message dated 2004:01:10 06:52:50 PM, John Cowan writes: > [....] truths are invariably tentative, subject to revision. >"A fact", said Stephen Jay Gould, "is a hypothesis from which it would >be perverse to withhold provisional assent." That's the best we get. IMHO John comes up with the best final word on this hoary ol' philosophical bonmot. Certain occultists are fond of pointing to this paradox with the saying: Nothing is true. Everthing is Permitted. As Above, So Below... >I believe firmly in the idea of empiricism. How quaint! I thought empiricism - on its own without any necessary tempering of its supposedly infallible universal "logic"- died a verrrry horrid messy death in World War One...and was dug up in WW2 by necrofiles to be only reburied again in the '60's... Being a very open-minded, curious Taoist, I myself much prefer an ever re-actiing, mutant mix o' pragmaticism, situationalism and idealism (as in "By Any Means Necessary, Possible and Imaginable") with a streakin' dash of naked spirituality and the usual Trickster bag and sleeves full o' mischief and creativity ;) -|-|--|---|-----|--------|-------------| Hanuman Zhang, heeding the Call(ing) to Divine Chaos & Creation _NADA BRAHMA_ < Sanskrit > "sound = Godhead" "You breathe redemption, motive, power, You're elemental, super-collider yeah tenn0!, You are air and earth, fire and ocean, You are Word, You are tenn0 tenn0!" - mortal "tenn0" _LILA_ < Sanskrit > 1. the universe is what happens when God wants to play - Divine Play - the play of the Divine in its Cosmic Dance, whimsy - like a child playing alone God the Cosmic Dancer - whose routine is all creatures and all worlds - the Cosmos flows - a world from the tireless unending resistless stream of God's energy that _is_ Lila 2. joyous exercise of spontaneity involved in the art of creation this is also Lila "A constellation is basially a conical chunk of stars with the apex at Earth with an arbitrary space angle." - Andreas Johansson "...divine chaos ...rumors of chaos have been known to enhance the ...vision.... for the godhead manifests no more of its reality than the limited grammar of each person's imagination and conceptual system can handle. A second advantage is suggested by William James in _Varieties of Religious Experience_. James affirms the possibilty of many gods, mostly because he takes seriously his multiverse theory of personal monads, each one of us experiencing a unique... revelation. An orderly monistic and monotheistic system, he fears, might succumb to a craving for logical coherence, and trim away some of the mystery, rich indeterminancy, and tragic ambiguity in a complete numinous experience. For some temperaments, the ambivalent gentleness and savagery of fate can be imagined effectively in a godhead split into personified attributes, sometimes at war, sometimes in shifting alliance." - Vernon Ruland, _Eight Sacred Horizons: The Religious Imagination East and West_ "We bow to the _satvika_ Shiva Whose _angika_ is the body Whose _vachika_ is the entire language Whose _aharya_ is the moon and the stars"