Thinking is part of reality

[onesandzeros]

[ QUOTE ]
The question I have is :In as much as man is involved in thinking who is this thinker that is presupposed?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think of it this way.

There is only ONE mind with infinite possibility and (expression. From this one mind we receive our thoughts just like a radio tower relays transmissions and broadcasts. With the information we receive, we choose what we like and do not like and rebroadcast it... If you want station 103.2 but tune into 103.4 you'll get a mixed signal.


When we get things in our virtual reality movie (awake hours) that we do not like, it is because we forget to remember what happens when we hold thoughts that we do not like. The five senses are so enjoyable that we forget to remember what happens when we separate from love and tune into hate. The 3d reality experience slowly gets more and more negative the further we move out of harmony with love. and then its over and over..

When we are "sleeping" we are going home to where we come from,. The invisible. Where are thoughs and desires manifest instantly...

When we wake up we are in 3d virtual reality. (80% of the time I forget!) the 5 senses can be as deceptive as beautiful.

Basically 50% of what we have been told since birth is a lie. LOL

[onesandzeros]

The lag or "delay: in time in our though manifesting is the 3rd dimension is a lesson of patience and holding onto thoughts we want and "tuning out" or discarding thoughts that we do not like.

What we "broadcast" in thought comes back in our experiences. The lag or time delay fools us as we are used to our thoughts manifesting instantly like in other dimensions...(when dreaming)

The more you resists what you do not like, the more you will experience just that...and vise versa. It can be no other way. Like "gravity" it is a mathematical invisible law. These laws can be broken but we always have to pay the consequences.

[carlo]

[ QUOTE ]

The question I have is :In as much as man is involved in thinking who is this thinker that is presupposed?



I think of it this way.

There is only ONE mind with infinite possibility and (expression. From this one mind we receive our thoughts just like a radio tower relays transmissions and broadcasts. With the information we receive, we choose what we like and do not like and rebroadcast it... If you want station 103.2 but tune into 103.4 you'll get a mixed signal.


When we get things in our virtual reality movie (awake hours) that we do not like, it is because we forget to remember what happens when we hold thoughts that we do not like. The five senses are so enjoyable that we forget to remember what happens when we separate from love and tune into hate. The 3d reality experience slowly gets more and more negative the further we move out of harmony with love. and then its over and over..

When we are "sleeping" we are going home to where we come from,. The invisible. Where are thoughs and desires manifest instantly...

When we wake up we are in 3d virtual reality. (80% of the time I forget!) the 5 senses can be as deceptive as beautiful.

Basically 50% of what we have been told since birth is a lie. LOL

Edited by onesandzeros (09/29/07 08:26 PM)

[/ QUOTE ]

I think we overlap to a significant extent. The question which philosophy has difficulty with is the position of the" Ego " or "I" in this reality. In consideration of Spinoza or even Hegel they perceived "pure thought" but had no place for the "Ego" in this milieu. This , of course, leaves Man as a passive actor in this realm of a pantheistic dynamic.

For the "Ego" to act in freedom he must in some way be removed from this deterministic pantheism of Spinoza. My post speaks to the activity of the "Ego" who presents itself as an INDIVIDUALITY and gains freedom through his earthly work while gaining knowledge of the heavenly which in Biblical terms is "Knowledge of Good and Evil".

Please note that the "Ego" "gains freedom" through his activity but this is accomplished through successive lives. Freedom is earned piecemeal and I agree this freedom is obtained through Love and only through Love.

[onesandzeros]

Very good points Carlo.

[carlo]

[ QUOTE ]
The lag or "delay: in time in our though manifesting is the 3rd dimension is a lesson of patience and holding onto thoughts we want and "tuning out" or discarding thoughts that we do not like.

What we "broadcast" in thought comes back in our experiences. The lag or time delay fools us as we are used to our thoughts manifesting instantly like in other dimensions...(when dreaming)

The more you resists what you do not like, the more you will experience just that...and vise versa. It can be no other way. Like "gravity" it is a mathematical invisible law. These laws can be broken but we always have to pay the consequences.

[/ QUOTE ]

Somewhere in here I see KARMA and would then agree that our actions come back to us. Not necessarily in this life. To be clear , Karma is not "punishment" but the the work to be accomplished in order to gain one's self as a free spiritual being;this of course, over many lives. Karma is related to the three soul states of man, his Thinking, Feeling, and Willing, not only his thinking.

[onesandzeros]

Again spot on I think Carlo.

[carlo]

Thanks, appreciate your posts. Our dynamics are very similar and merge appropriately.

[Philo]

If the concept of a thought entails that there is a thinker, then anyone who would claim that there can be thoughts without a thinker would be obliged to explain how such a concept is coherent. That's the onus argument. I can make sense of and understand thoughts that belong to a thinker, but seem to reach a conceptual impasse when one says that there can be such a thing as a thought just 'free floating,' absent anything that produced it that would be the subject having the thought. There's nothing thin or dodgy about that position.

Do human beings create thoughts? I would say yes.

Beyond that, I don't know what to make of the rest of your post unless you are more careful to explain the concepts you are using. I don't know what nebulous being you're referring to or what the sentence "Another approach is that Man is a being "thought" within a thoughtfull world and one lives within "thoughts" and in growth upward Man works experiences the same" means, or what the "Ego" means to you.

[carlo]

[ QUOTE ]
f the concept of a thought entails that there is a thinker, then anyone who would claim that there can be thoughts without a thinker would be obliged to explain how such a concept is coherent. That's the onus argument. I can make sense of and understand thoughts that belong to a thinker, but seem to reach a conceptual impasse when one says that there can be such a thing as a thought just 'free floating,' absent anything that produced it that would be the subject having the thought. There's nothing thin or dodgy about that position.

Do human beings create thoughts? I would say yes.

Beyond that, I don't know what to make of the rest of your post unless you are more careful to explain the concepts you are using. I don't know what nebulous being you're referring to or what the sentence "Another approach is that Man is a being "thought" within a thoughtfull world and one lives within "thoughts" and in growth upward Man works experiences the same" means, or what the "Ego" means to you.


[/ QUOTE ]

One approach to this would be your personal experience in which you "have a thought". I'm reminded of a post by DS in which he stated that the thoughts come to a person , more like an experience than a causal connection of "I produce the thought'. More like "I experience the thought".

In this light, consideration can be given to "experiencing the thought" in which an individual reacts to this experience it becomes clearer that the idea that Man produces these thoughts becomes questionable. It doesn't answer the question of where the thought "comes from" or whether there is a "thinker' that produces these thoughts but it does lead to Man "experiencing thoughts".

My consideration relates to non sense bound thinking in which a person is able to enter the supersensible reality of thinking in which "thoughts"are seen as living entities.

There was a discussion of Goethe and Schiller in which he discussed his "archtypes" and Schiller stated that this was just a thought in your mind and not real and Goethe responded to the effect that this "archtype" as real to him or more so than what we would call sense bound reality.

I don't believe I can do more justice to this but I would recommend Steiner's "Philosophy of Freedom"-translation by Michael Wilson which is much clearer in presentation.

To call an unknown entity(Thinker) into the production of thoughts is the very same thing as saying that "G" , or chemical reactions, or one's self,etc. produces thoughts ; all of which are subject to question. The question becomes as to how does man relate to "thoughts" and what is the nature of thoughts. Otherwise we can slip into a never ending causal absurdity in many of these approaches. It's the same as saying thoughts are produced by the brain as the gall bladder produces bile.

[onesandzeros]

[ QUOTE ]
One approach to this would be your personal experience in which you "have a thought". I'm reminded of a post by DS in which he stated that the thoughts come to a person , more like an experience than a causal connection of "I produce the thought'. More like "I experience the thought".

In this light, consideration can be given to "experiencing the thought" in which an individual reacts to this experience it becomes clearer that the idea that Man produces these thoughts becomes questionable. It doesn't answer the question of where the thought "comes from" or whether there is a "thinker' that produces these thoughts but it does lead to Man "experiencing thoughts".[ QUOTE ]


I think it could very well be exactly as a radio or tv station. In the invisibility of combined thought (frequencies) we are like towers in that whatever possible station we tune into, so long as we tune in correctly by getting the math right we get a strong signal...

The invention of radio and tv has to be along these lines...

Creating virtual reality, within virtual reality...