GOD'S NUMBERS
- Thread starter Music Nfluenced
- Start date
1) This is only as anthropocentric as reality is. In reality, humans have the capacity to understand what is self and what is absolute (if even only in theory). This does NOT mean that only humans have this self. It simply means that humans have the capacity to understand it's existence. In other words, the same type of self (or soul) can be understood to exist in all living organisms. Ergo, no anthropocentricism.
2) However convincing a fictional novel is, the result is either to feed the animal propensities or it is to spark the intellect into considering the nature of self. Most of the time it is the former and not the latter. For example, author X writes neato-convincing, sci-fi novel, makes money selling it, then uses money to enhance his sleeping, eating, mating and defending capacities.
2) However convincing a fictional novel is, the result is either to feed the animal propensities or it is to spark the intellect into considering the nature of self. Most of the time it is the former and not the latter. For example, author X writes neato-convincing, sci-fi novel, makes money selling it, then uses money to enhance his sleeping, eating, mating and defending capacities.
he told you not to use the "self" and "the absolute"....
I don't know if you're aware of this but apes, dolphins and maybe even elephants can recognize themselves in the mirror
does this mean they have the notion of "self" according to your definition (which I haven't seen yet ) and whatever "self" is supposed to mean???
I don't know if you're aware of this but apes, dolphins and maybe even elephants can recognize themselves in the mirror
does this mean they have the notion of "self" according to your definition (which I haven't seen yet ) and whatever "self" is supposed to mean???
I was just thinking the same thing. Some animals appear to have the capacity to understand self - so that leaves the absolute.
Do you understand the absolute 916, even in theory? I don't think you do. After all, your definition of what the absolute consists of differs from mine, which differs from almost everyone elses. What makes you think yours is right - even in theory? Humans have the capacity to devise their own 'reality', producing a world picture that suits their own understanding and desire. Thus, there are millions of different 'realities' (Well, there is only one reality, but people interpret it differently and construct highly variable patterns).
That is not absolute.
Do you understand the absolute 916, even in theory? I don't think you do. After all, your definition of what the absolute consists of differs from mine, which differs from almost everyone elses. What makes you think yours is right - even in theory? Humans have the capacity to devise their own 'reality', producing a world picture that suits their own understanding and desire. Thus, there are millions of different 'realities' (Well, there is only one reality, but people interpret it differently and construct highly variable patterns).
That is not absolute.
