How to get past the self-reference problem?

[Gesundheit]

Summary:

"Stealing is evil."

• No. Evil is a judgement.

"But judgement is a judgement, so?"

• No. Judgement is actually an accurate label, not a judgement.

"Okay. So is label a judgement or a label?"

• Label is another label for itself.

"Okay. So stealing is stealing, and we can't say anything further."

Hence, the self-reference problem.

.....

Why can't we get past that point? Or can we?

What are the best ways to deal with this problem? And what's next?

Out-of-the-box thinking is most appreciated!

Edited December 18, 2020 by Gesundheit

[Seraphim]

When we don't confuse the dream with reality it is no longer problematic. So stealing is evil, and if I witness it maybe I will call the police, but I will not think/feel that the label is the absolute reality: That which is.

Edited December 18, 2020 by Seraphim

[Nemra]

We can simplify it like this.

A thought is a thought.

That sentence is a thought again. You will get stuck when you think about something which references to the thing which you are thinking about. So, you can't solve this by thinking. You have to realize that it is a thought. Being silent or aware of your thoughts can help to get past that point.

Hold this thought in your mind.

This is a thought.

Realize that that is a thought too.

Edited December 18, 2020 by Understander

[Carl-Richard]

You can't behind this problem. All statements are relative. The only solution is to shut up.

[Mason Riggle]

Remember this phrase- "The map is not the territory"

The map (the concepts we use to describe reality) can never be 100% accurate, without actually being what it's mapping (the territory). No 'description of reality' is ever the same as 'reality'. 

Edited December 18, 2020 by Mason Riggle

[Nahm]

How to get past the self-reference problem?

No how will do as it is still the activity of the mind. Only bringing the mind to absolute stillness will do. 

That there is a self reference problem and that there is a solution is said activity. 

The Babble-on is all so Grey.

[xxxx]

@Gesundheit,

(Through the basic moral reasoning that is agreed upon by the society at large, stealing would be considered wrong, and the person would be tried in a court of law - that is established knowledge.)

 

I seek to move beyond that here.

 

Nonetheless, to deal with this paradox, we will have to weaken the assumptions, through the method of stratification, for this circularity to disappear.

So, we can divide this further into different categories, or orders of knowledge: 

 

Stratification:

 

Stealing is considered evil by the society

 

Who make the society?

 

Individuals make the society, and each have opinions.

 

What are opinions?

 

Opinions are made of thoughts.

 

What are judgements?

 

When opinions come together and are treated as established knowledge.

 

So,

 

Personal thoughts and established knowledge = judgements.

 

Therefore,

 

Opinions = Judgement

 

Would there be any opinions without individuals?

 

No.

 

If the opinions do not come together as established knowledge, can they form judgements?

 

No.

 

 

So with the same logic,

 

For a label to exist there should be a personal thought and established knowledge. 

So,

Label = Opinion

 

So there can be a deductive reasoning of this sort, too - Using a syllogism here -

 

Every opinion is a judgement

A label is an opinion

Therefore,

A label is a judgement

 

Hence, stealing is just an opinion = judgement = label

.

.

Feel free to disagree. 

 

Edited December 18, 2020 by xxxx

[Gesundheit]

4 hours ago, Seraphim said:

When we don't confuse the dream with reality it is no longer problematic. So stealing is evil, and if I witness it maybe I will call the police, but I will not think/feel that the label is the absolute reality: That which is.

Okay, but then 'that which is' is also in the realm of self-reference. We are referring to something inside of being. So the problem is still there.

[Gesundheit]

4 hours ago, Understander said:

We can simplify it like this.

A thought is a thought.

That sentence is a thought again. You will get stuck when you think about something which references to the thing which you are thinking about. So, you can't solve this by thinking. You have to realize that it is a thought. Being silent or aware of your thoughts can help to get past that point.

Hold this thought in your mind.

This is a thought.

Realize that that is a thought too.

Again, realization/awareness is also self-referential. I can become aware of the thoughts. It's called going meta. But then I go meta on going meta, and I become aware of awareness. And so awareness is still referring to itself.

[Gesundheit]

4 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

You can't behind this problem. All statements are relative.

Well, that's what I thought too, but I hoped that I could encourage some people to question this assumption and think outside of the box.

4 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

The only solution is to shut up.

There could not be a solution before the problem even existed. This does not solve the problem, it just prevents it.

[Someone here]

6 hours ago, Gesundheit said:

Summary:

"Stealing is evil."

• No. Evil is a judgement.

"But judgement is a judgement, so?"

• No. Judgement is actually an accurate label, not a judgement.

"Okay. So is label a judgement or a label?"

• Label is another label for itself.

"Okay. So stealing is stealing, and we can't say anything further."

Hence, the self-reference problem.

Yes stealing is evil and evil is a judgment and judgment is a judgment and judgment is a label and label is a label and so stealing is stealing because everything is itself. What else do you expect? It's not a self reference "proplem". It's exactly how it should be. 

Edited December 18, 2020 by Someone here

[Mu_]

6 hours ago, Gesundheit said:

Summary:

"Stealing is evil."

• No. Evil is a judgement.

"But judgement is a judgement, so?"

• No. Judgement is actually an accurate label, not a judgement.

"Okay. So is label a judgement or a label?"

• Label is another label for itself.

"Okay. So stealing is stealing, and we can't say anything further."

Hence, the self-reference problem.

.....

Why can't we get past that point? Or can we?

What are the best ways to deal with this problem? And what's next?

Out-of-the-box thinking is most appreciated!

All this relies on an assumption that there are others or someone giving definitions to what seems to be, or assumes there are objective definitions (like a Authoritative Book of some sort, that if one finds they will now know all the actual definitions of all things out there).

Also generally in most conversation on matters such as judgement, labels, thoughts, and pretty much any other topic, there again is an assumption of someone or another having such things or doing such things.  Rather than say a conscious unfolding of experience.  Or just happening.

Not saying one or the other is ultimately the case, but if you want to let in "more" really let in the alternative stated here for a while and let it sink in for as long as tolerable, lol

[Gesundheit]

6 hours ago, Mason Riggle said:

Remember this phrase- "The map is not the territory"

The map (the concepts we use to describe reality) can never be 100% accurate, without actually being what it's mapping (the territory). No 'description of reality' is ever the same as 'reality'. 

But how can that phrase be technically correct when it's actually also a self-referential statement? There's a leap of faith here getting sweeped under the rug.

[Gesundheit]

6 hours ago, Nahm said:

How to get past the self-reference problem?

No how will do as it is still the activity of the mind. Only bringing the mind to absolute stillness will do. 

That there is a self reference problem and that there is a solution is said activity.

Preventing is not the same as solving. Prevention is like running away and hiding. Solving means facing the problem head-on and coming out the other side with an actual solution, or at least admitting defeat.

6 hours ago, Nahm said:

The Babble-on is all so Grey.

???

[Gesundheit]

3 hours ago, xxxx said:

@Gesundheit

For a label to exist there should be a personal thought and established knowledge. 

So,

Label = Opinion

The sleight of hand you did here; false conclusion drawn from false induction. You equated your definition of opinions with the definition of labels. Opinion is smaller than label. Label contains opinion and description.

[Nahm]

@Gesundheit

Read your op again but not sure what you mean by preventing & solving and what the problem is...?  

Are we on the same page that this is all the activity of mind / thought..? 

[electroBeam]

8 hours ago, Gesundheit said:

Summary:

"Stealing is evil."

• No. Evil is a judgement.

"But judgement is a judgement, so?"

• No. Judgement is actually an accurate label, not a judgement.

"Okay. So is label a judgement or a label?"

• Label is another label for itself.

"Okay. So stealing is stealing, and we can't say anything further."

Hence, the self-reference problem.

.....

Why can't we get past that point? Or can we?

What are the best ways to deal with this problem? And what's next?

Out-of-the-box thinking is most appreciated!

Not sure if this is out if the box, but such situations are always best dealt with completely letting go in the form of zazen or equivelant meditations IMO

[Carl-Richard]

3 hours ago, Gesundheit said:

There could not be a solution before the problem even existed. This does not solve the problem, it just prevents it.

There is no solution my dude.