Wayfarer

:clap:

I sometimes feel it. Tosh. That is the nihilist reading of Mah?y?na. But let's not get involved in sectarian disputes.

that's what I was referring to. If you're referring to the Goenka retreats, I completed one of those in 2007-8, and have no criticism of them, althoug...

It can be an unthinkably long time between those opportunities, however.

Hence the designation, "being".

Incomprehensible verbiage.

I think you're framing the issue wrongly. Actually, I think the awakening that Buddhism refers to is not pleasurable, it's exceedingly painful, as evi...

do you think the Bohr-Einstein debates were about physics or metaphysics?

Trying again. Its models are mathematical formulations that are tested against observational data, but that is not an exercise in metaphysics. The dis...

Well if you don’t understand the point there’s not a lot of use trying to explain it again. With regards to the reading of the dial - there is a philo...

That's because most physicists are not employed to speculate. It's a devilishly difficult thing to understand, but as I understand it, it doesn't make...

But that's just what is up for debate! that's the whole point! Some physicists insist that there are infininite parallel worlds, others insist that th...

Interpretations. That is the point. An observation of a physical phenomenon is just that - you register a measurement on an instrument, there's no roo...

In S?t? Zen, which is the first book I read on the subject - the well-known book, Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind - there is a constant admonition throughou...

Of course. There's a book called The Metaphysics within Physics, Tim Maudlin. Another is Nature Loves to Hide, by Shimon Malin - he's more on the myst...

I can tell you straight up, Buddhist meditation is infinitely less pleasurable than masturbation.

Interpretations of physics can be wildly different philosophically, yet both consistent with the observations. How is that 'physical'? And don't put w...

Ain't metaphysical, by definition. Physics is not metaphysics, otherwise what would be the point of having a separate subject area? Metaphysics raises...

Have a read of the cultural impact of empiricism.

Whether abstract objects exist and if so in what sense, as by definition they’re not subject to empirical scrutiny.

It is one of a group of questions classed as avyakarta, ‘undetermined’ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_unanswered_questions

Can't say that. There was at least an attempt. The Australian PM was obliged to stand up to a world audience and say climate change is something that ...

Wouldn’t that be more the domain of natural philosophy i.e. science? Like, for example, physics is observing experimental results. Metaphysics is cons...

:up: That's very close to the mark. ‘Being’ is a verb, ‘object’ a noun. The discussion to date doesn’t account for that.

I’m saying that the term ‘metaphysics’ has a scope, defined originally against Aristotle, developed by the subsequent tradition. Tao Te Ching falls ou...

The distinction between reality and appearance is writ large through the whole Platonic corpus. The sensory domain is phenomena, the realm of forms is...

The Buddhist is concerned with a practical task, i.e. liberation from inner conflict etc. Metaphysical questions are regarded as a distraction. (Murti...

Of course but it is a small win.

Do you have an example of what you would call an ontological distinction?

Hey that’s a good idea. I’ll read up on it again, I had only ever given it a passing glance previously. :up:

Never a Sartre fanboy. I did a unit in undergrad, literally couldn't fathom the first page of Being and Nothingness. Later on I began to understand a ...

smaller cell the better, I'd say.

Bannon charged with contempt of congress. About bloody time. Deserves jail.

This interpretation of Spinoza I can go with: That is entirely in keeping with my philosophical stance: that the reason human being is significant, is...

https://youtu.be/Q1YqgPAtzho

It's not 'my' definition, it's the definition. Objects are not beings, as they are not subject of experience. (This is the origination of the hard pro...

Love you too. :heart:

What originally prompted you to refer to that paper was my contention that the original definition of the word 'ontology' was derived from the first-p...

Has anyone else, or will anyone else, seek to make this distinction? In a discussion of the nature of being, isn't it a legitimate subject for discuss...

I apologise for the facetious comment above. In humans alone, the mind reaches the point of being able to consider such issues. That marks humans off ...

Well, go and chat with your dog, then, if you have one. He might know.

(Note also that the word that is given as 'substance' here, was in the original 'ouisia', which is nearer in meaning to 'being' than 'substance' in th...

Rocks exist, but apes and humans are beings, and it's a significant distinction. That's all I wanted to say.

that is the only distinction I wished to make, and up til now, there has been no acknowledgment that there is such a distinction to be made. Love you ...

I'd honestly like to understand why the distinction between beings and things is considered controversial, and also why it is not considered. It's an ...

I don't think it provides the liberty to re-define the term according to your preference.

I get the point, and I think it's mistaken. I don't know much about Heidegger, but I do know he speaks of 'the forgetfulness of being'. Maybe that cou...

They’re temporal distinctions.

The distinction between ‘beings’ and ‘things’ is a fundamental ontological distinction. If you lose sight of that then what ontological distinctions a...

I've resisted reading Heidegger although quite a bit has filtered through in these debates and from various readings I've done. Thanks although I thin...