Is Logic True?

[tsuki]

@Shadowraix I'm sorry, but I can't accept what you're saying yet.
That is because I have contemplated these issues and came to different "conclusions".

8 hours ago, Shadowraix said:

Look at the life you and everybody experiences. Everyday we rely on things like consistency. All of science relies of observation and for that experience to always happen under the same occurrences. 

Probability theory is the language of applied science. It speaks about trends and expectations.
You can never repeat an experiment exactly. If you do, then your method of measurement is not precise enough.
This remark is more general, but I posed it in scientific terms to relate it to what you wrote.

8 hours ago, Shadowraix said:

But these mental tools for mapping are incredibly useful. Ask how does this even work? The connection between concept and direct experience. 

They don't work. They arise in emptiness and we rationalize the connection when we introduce time.
When you observe reality as it unfolds, it is governed by synchronicity.
Causal chains of reasoning only exist in retrospect, or when you plan ahead. 
However, when you observe this reasoning as it unfolds, it is governed by synchronicity too.
Everything arises in emptiness for no reason whatsoever. The only rational response to a universe like that is: gratitude and happiness.

8 hours ago, Shadowraix said:

But these mental tools for mapping are incredibly useful. [...]

Illusions help navigate illusions no? 

My question to you is:

• What is the use of usefulness?
• What is the reason for indulging in reason?

(These are the same question)

Edited April 28, 2019 by tsuki

[tsuki]

1 hour ago, now is forever said:

the difference is you can’t get lost in a map but you can get lost in a territory. 

Oh really? What if a map is complicated or poorly designed?

[now is forever]

Just now, tsuki said:

Oh really? What if a map is complicated or poorly designed?

you still only get lost in the territory 

[tsuki]

10 minutes ago, now is forever said:

you still only get lost in the territory 

Oh really? What if I'm standing in the middle of the shopping center and I know where I am, but I don't know where to go?
I'm trying to read a poorly designed map and I wander off into imagination, trying to guess what kind of horrors the designer's childhood must have been like to produce such a monstrosity... and POOF, I don't even know why I came here in the first place. What did I want to buy here, exactly?

[now is forever]

you certainly get lost in the territory!

[tsuki]

3 minutes ago, now is forever said:

you certainly get lost in the territory!

Ahahaha, yes... certainty is our greatest friend when we don't want to get lost in maps.

[Leo Gura]

"The better the model the bigger the problem."

Getting lost in the map is much more problematic than getting lost in the territory. Finding your way out of a forrest is easy compared to finding your way out of your own mind. The forrest doesn't play devilish tricks on you the way your own mind does.

[now is forever]

21 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

"The better the model the bigger the problem."

Getting lost in the map is much more problematic than getting lost in the territory. Finding your way out of a forrest is easy compared to finding your way out of your own mind. The forrest doesn't play devilish tricks on you the way your own mind does.

well if the map is a map and a territory is a territory you still don’t get lost in the map. although your finger might get lost in the map.

Edited April 28, 2019 by now is forever

[tsuki]

23 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

To make this real clear: if you draw a map of Florida in the sand on a beach in Florida, your map is literally Florida.

@now is forever

[now is forever]

well but if you get lost there you would know where you are, so you are not lost in the map, not even lost in the territory.

[tsuki]

@now is forever Okay, how about this:

You're reading a Buddhist scripture and POOF, you're enlightened.
How is that not getting lost in the map?

[now is forever]

15 minutes ago, tsuki said:

@now is forever Okay, how about this:

You're reading a Buddhist scripture and POOF, you're enlightened.
How is that not getting lost in the map?

that’s finding yourself in the map 

doesn‘t mean though you are not lost in the territory.

Edited April 28, 2019 by now is forever

[tsuki]

So, in order to preserve the separation between map and the territory, you have to say that being lost is equal to not being lost.
I'm proud, you little devil.

[Leo Gura]

Map and territory are ONE.

Stop creating dualities!

[now is forever]

12 minutes ago, tsuki said:

So, in order to preserve the separation between map and the territory, you have to say that being lost is equal to not being lost.
I'm proud, you little devil.

no it’s not equal - it depends on what you are searching for in a map. and if the map is really the map or if it’s a territory 

[tsuki]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Map and territory are ONE.

Stop creating dualities!

You know that God creates through devilry, right? We're instruments of God's will hahahahaha.

[mandyjw]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

"The better the model the bigger the problem."

Getting lost in the map is much more problematic than getting lost in the territory. Finding your way out of a forrest is easy compared to finding your way out of your own mind. The forrest doesn't play devilish tricks on you the way your own mind does.

Have you ever really literally been lost in the woods Leo? 

[Anton Rogachevski]

[Shadowraix]

@tsuki I see what you are saying when you brought up synchronicity. 

I'm just not coming at it with the perspective of getting to the bottom(less) of it but rather pragmatism of navigating life. Which this often seems to require the lens of the ego which will bring some abstraction away. 

[tsuki]

15 hours ago, Shadowraix said:

I'm just not coming at it with the perspective of getting to the bottom(less) of it but rather pragmatism of navigating life. Which this often seems to require the lens of the ego which will bring some abstraction away. 

Surrendering to life is a powerful spiritual practice.
It only seems that you need to keep hold of the ego in order to function.
The answers arise out of emptiness while you serve your purpose. Then, you die.

How is that any different from ego failing to survive and getting killed?
It's not like you can help yourself from living the life you live right now.
Perspective is just a matter of meaning-making context you're clinging to.

I get what you're saying though. 'Ego is important to survive' is the branch of spirituality Leo is selling.
What I'm saying is simply that ego has no existence of its own and thus, has no power to do anything.
Its only function is to provide the smokescreen when something needs to be created out of nothing.

Edited April 29, 2019 by tsuki