ymer said:It is that it's not the answer.
Legarto Rey said:Zen teaches that "seeking" the answer, misses the point. The whole, finger pointing at the moon, analogy. THIS, and every aspect of our capacity to experience "the experience", is the answer. Sorry, couldn't help myself.
Metaphysical sophistry aside, tryptamines(and other true entheogens), provide regular folks with a generally reliable means of accessing deeply mystical mind states. Non entheogen techniques(meditation, chant, drumming, physical extremis....etc), while useful as adjuncts and integrators, offer only a minority, reliable, ergonomic and reproducible entry into the "ego-death" EXPERIENCE.
Peace
BundleflowerPower said:Legarto Rey said:Zen teaches that "seeking" the answer, misses the point. The whole, finger pointing at the moon, analogy. THIS, and every aspect of our capacity to experience "the experience", is the answer. Sorry, couldn't help myself.
Metaphysical sophistry aside, tryptamines(and other true entheogens), provide regular folks with a generally reliable means of accessing deeply mystical mind states. Non entheogen techniques(meditation, chant, drumming, physical extremis....etc), while useful as adjuncts and integrators, offer only a minority, reliable, ergonomic and reproducible entry into the "ego-death" EXPERIENCE.
Peace
Agreed. Finding new questions is much more interesting.
Indeed, like what is short for 'dimethyltryptamine'?gibran2 said:ymer said:It is that it's not the answer.
Depends on the question.

inaniel said:If this thread has taught me anything
well, it hasn't, but it reminds me how much I dislike vague pseudo-insightful references.
inaniel said:If this thread has taught me anything...

I take issue with that mentality, actually. Before I started working in neuroscience, I studied mathematics, and I think there is a level of absolute certainty you get in something like number theory that should satisfy anyone. You can take issue with the fundamental axioms, but, within the system, absolute truths are knowable. The question: are there infinitely many primes is answerable.Doc Buxin said:inaniel said:If this thread has taught me anything...
...it is that the OP believes that there are "answers".![]()
Nathanial.Dread said:I take issue with that mentality, actually. Before I started working in neuroscience, I studied mathematics, and I think there is a level of absolute certainty you get in something like number theory that should satisfy anyone. You can take issue with the fundamental axioms, but, within the system, absolute truths are knowable. The question: are there infinitely many primes is answerable.Doc Buxin said:inaniel said:If this thread has taught me anything...
...it is that the OP believes that there are "answers".![]()
Blessings
~ND

Did you catch the part about needing to accept the base set of axioms? You're restricted to the system you're working in (which is in turn restricted to one reality), but within the system, there is absolute truth.SpartanII said:Nathanial.Dread said:I take issue with that mentality, actually. Before I started working in neuroscience, I studied mathematics, and I think there is a level of absolute certainty you get in something like number theory that should satisfy anyone. You can take issue with the fundamental axioms, but, within the system, absolute truths are knowable. The question: are there infinitely many primes is answerable.Doc Buxin said:inaniel said:If this thread has taught me anything...
...it is that the OP believes that there are "answers".![]()
Blessings
~ND
Sure, in this reality maybe...![]()
Nathanial.Dread said:Did you catch the part about needing to accept the base set of axioms? You're restricted to the system you're working in (which is in turn restricted to one reality), but within the system, there is absolute truth.SpartanII said:Nathanial.Dread said:I take issue with that mentality, actually. Before I started working in neuroscience, I studied mathematics, and I think there is a level of absolute certainty you get in something like number theory that should satisfy anyone. You can take issue with the fundamental axioms, but, within the system, absolute truths are knowable. The question: are there infinitely many primes is answerable.Doc Buxin said:inaniel said:If this thread has taught me anything...
...it is that the OP believes that there are "answers".![]()
Blessings
~ND
Sure, in this reality maybe...![]()
Blessings
~ND
This gets into some kind of Godelian logic stuff, but given that you're always within a logical system (and that all systems are incomplete), I feel like it's best to make do with what you have.SpartanII said:Nathanial.Dread said:Did you catch the part about needing to accept the base set of axioms? You're restricted to the system you're working in (which is in turn restricted to one reality), but within the system, there is absolute truth.SpartanII said:Nathanial.Dread said:I take issue with that mentality, actually. Before I started working in neuroscience, I studied mathematics, and I think there is a level of absolute certainty you get in something like number theory that should satisfy anyone. You can take issue with the fundamental axioms, but, within the system, absolute truths are knowable. The question: are there infinitely many primes is answerable.Doc Buxin said:inaniel said:If this thread has taught me anything...
...it is that the OP believes that there are "answers".![]()
Blessings
~ND
Sure, in this reality maybe...![]()
Blessings
~ND
Hey! My axiom is just fine, thank you.:!:
(I didn't know all your big words and stuff, sorry). I think I get it now though.):lol:
But the thing is, if there is absolute truth, but only relative to the system you're working in, then it's not really absolute though is it?
Semantics are funny...