What's new
By:

What does religious moderation consist of?

Siro said:
Then how is one thought separated from another if not through some criterion on its validity? How does one arrive at a thought, or forms an opinion? How can one opinion be more valid than another? How can you mock people, as you often do, if you're not commentating on the "correctness" of their thoughts?

I'm having a hard time understanding your perspective.
Click to expand...

This is a terrible thicket of concepts, and I'm not sure either of us are motivated enough to get through it. You're speaking of thought more in terms of patterns of rationality, which, for me, is a very small part.

Also, you can mock someone for their seriousness and conviction with respect to their own version of Truth without putting forward any alternative truth. Surely you know this.
 
@OL

I've really been enjoying how you follow me around and 'like' every post that seems to be disagreeing with me. That's been happening for months now.

Cheers.
 
NAOS said:
This is a terrible thicket of concepts, and I'm not sure either of us are motivated enough to get through it. You're speaking of thought more in terms of patterns of rationality, which, for me, is a very small part.

Also, you can mock someone for their seriousness and conviction with respect to their own version of Truth without putting forward any alternative truth. Surely you know this.
Click to expand...

I don't see how you're not expressing a view on correctness. I agree that one must be flexible in accepting new information to re-evaluate one's position, but I suspect that's not what you're talking about.

I honestly have no idea what you're advancing. If you're not motivated to explain, then point me to someone who is. I'm honestly curious.
 
Siro said:
I don't see how you're not expressing a view on correctness. I agree that one must be flexible in accepting new information to re-evaluate one's position, but I suspect that's not what you're talking about.

I honestly have no idea what you're advancing. If you're not motivated to explain, then point me to someone who is. I'm honestly curious.
Click to expand...

Deleuze's Difference & Repetition. Particularly the chapter on Thought.

(I am expressing a view on correctness. A critical one.)
 
NAOS said:
Deleuze's Difference & Repetition. Particularly the chapter on Thought.

(I am expressing a view on correctness. A critical one.)
Click to expand...

Best post.
This is an incredible read. First three chapters are some of the best I've ever read.

"The image of thought..."


Also, Anti-Oedipe.
 
Curious... [MENTION=249]NAOS[/MENTION] ..

Did this read contribute to your pursuit of/desire to spend time with animals?

The bond between nature and mind..
 
Dr. Jones said:
I'm not sure what you mean.. yes, I'm serious.

Not sure if you're asking if I've read the books or if I'm serious that I REALLY enjoyed Anti-Oedipus.
Click to expand...

Dr. Jones said:
Curious... [MENTION=249]NAOS[/MENTION] ..

Did this read contribute to your pursuit of/desire to spend time with animals?

The bond between nature and mind..
Click to expand...

that's cool, brough. Definitely rad material. Deleuze and Guattari changed the way I see things.

The animal interest preceded them, but I they've definitely deepened certain interests.
 
Psychoanalysis beginning now.

I don't believe NAOS would describe himself as none of atheist, believer, or agnostic. Because in doing so he would allow the labels and ideals of a world culture demanding one's perspective to be shaped by their views rather than one's own. I would think NAOS is somewhat bent on ridding his psyche, as much as possible, from the confines of what others before him have mandated as factual... while holding these "truths" as they are so-called as opinion. A pursuit of less mind-****ing clutter/noise. Taking meaning back to the most rudimentary of basic life elements. Breaking things down to the simplest forms until there is no more.

So God is not yet something ripe for contemplation, but rather something for a later time, when true introspection can be better depended upon by "self" rather than culture, history, or peers.

I don't know NAOS, though.

End.
 
I feel like writing a post that hotttnickkk will 'like':



NAOS is not a nice guy. He makes grumpy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top