An Odd Argument

[Aimblack]

@Preetom My internal dialog would be more like

Thought: Why is this statement true?

Thought: Because I say it is!

Thought: But...that sounds so hollow..and stupid

Thought: Look a squirrel !! And by the way why are left and right switched in a mirror but up and down are the same? Damn that girl has a nice ass...  

Edited November 12, 2018 by Aimblack

[Rilles]

9 hours ago, Aimblack said:

And by the way why are left and right switched in a mirror but up and down are the same?

What color is a mirror?

 

Tada...

[tsuki]

16 hours ago, Preetom said:

Isn't it kind of an odd, fruitless argument?

It is.

Arguing about perspectives in terms of logical reasoning is ultimately pointless because in order to do so, you have 'put' one perspective 'inside' another. This creates paradoxes like you just pointed out and the logical mind gets stuck at the absurdity of the situation.

What you have to do instead is to inhabit your opponent's perspective and from its inside show its obfuscated paradoxes (without relying on the perspective you're arguing for). Only then, after a person is open (and mindfucked) enough - you get to show them where you are coming from and how this perspective 'cures'/incorporates the paradoxes you just pointed out in their reasoning.

Practically, in order to do that - you have to be higher on the spiral.

[now is forever]

it’s obvious why it seems like the non dual teacher has to prove it. because he believes in non duality, that means materialism is also part of it, as long as you are proving you are still dual and in that sense you are showing the dual friend that he‘s right.

Edited November 13, 2018 by now is forever

[Preetom]

10 minutes ago, tsuki said:

Arguing about perspectives in terms of logical reasoning is ultimately pointless because in order to do so, you have 'put' one perspective 'inside' another. This creates paradoxes like you just pointed out and the logical mind gets stuck at the absurdity of the situation.

Thanks for the input. Another silly analogy came up earlier.

It's like I saw a pond in a dream, but I can't swim. Then I wake up and go to you who is a swimming instructor. Just when you take me to the swimming pool to teach me swimming, I scream out, ''No no no no....we have to go to the pond I saw in the dream. Then and ONLY then can you teach me how to swim and I can learn'' 

Isn't this same thing happening? The materialist scientist urges to start from an objective, external world...something that the Self-realized dismisses altogether from the get go. Just because you don't play inside the scientist's own playground, he denies your game altogether.

[Preetom]

@now is forever

I'm not talking about any specific people here. I am mentioning a common trend here.

Nonduality is it's own game. It has it's own working system and ultimately verifying that final result. 

I just don't get why people bring in a 'scientific' paradigm into it and declare that only when Nonduality fits the scientific paradigm, then and only then I'll acknowledge it or take it seriously. If you can't do that, then that means you're spreading some hoax.

Basically, if you don't play my game in my playground, then your play is bullshit, no matter what/how you're playing.

Can you conflate the knowledge of poetry, history, art etc. into objective scientific paradigm? Can you say that repeat World War I, then and only then I'll acknowledge it. Does this mean, the study of history is a hoax/woo woo?

This again boils down to the core of epistemology, how can we really know anything for sure? What is the TRUTH?

[now is forever]

@Preetom the truth is that in actuality both perspectives are true. even though science was there to dissolve horriffic malbeliefs in history. the scientiffic paradigm has become a belief and a monotheism on top, the highest god is the proof. and people pay with money to buy their souls free.

what do we expect?

Edited November 13, 2018 by now is forever

[tsuki]

41 minutes ago, Preetom said:

Isn't this same thing happening? The materialist scientist urges to start from an objective, external world...something that the Self-realized dismisses altogether from the get go. Just because you don't play inside the scientist's own playground, he denies your game altogether.

@Preetom I don't actually think that it is. I have a hunch that you are judging the dual perspective from within the non-dual.
The catch is that there is no duality between duality and non-duality.

[Preetom]

1 minute ago, tsuki said:

The catch is that there is no duality between duality and non-duality.

Only from the real Non Duality! All distinctions must collapse then and we wouldn't have any conversation

[tsuki]

1 minute ago, Preetom said:

All distinctions must collapse then and we wouldn't have any conversation

Are "we" having a conversation?

[Preetom]

Just now, tsuki said:

Are "we" having a conversation?

Not really if I'm honest 

[tsuki]

1 minute ago, Preetom said:

Not really if I'm honest 

Then I guess that we're having an 'odd argument'.

[Preetom]

2 minutes ago, tsuki said:

Then I guess that we're having an 'odd argument'.

Right  

[Shadowraix]

You can tell and even demonstrate to a child to not touch a hot stove but they'll do it anyway and only learn when they experience it.

Once you tell them what you experienced, tell them how they can experience it.

The burden of proof part of an argument seems to be of a solely debate for the sake of debate nature and doesn't seem to display any true interest in what has no proof.

If you were interested in validating/invalidating the existence of ghosts surely you'd go out and try to experience it yourself than debate online trying to get other people to prove their experiences to you.

Truth is found. You can tell them where to find it all you want, but they gotta desire to do it.

Edited November 13, 2018 by Shadowraix