jump to last post 1-28 of 28 discussions (96 posts)

Beyond Consciousness

  1. profile image0
    Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago

    Hi there.
    I am posting this Forum Topic in the firm belief that there are those among us who truly refuse to accept the limitations of logic, ritual systems, what have you.

    What I define as the "Need to Know".

    Should human beings accept that they have full knowledge of everything they need, lacking no thought process of any thing: they would be beyond consciousness; (consciousness being the awareness of a thought or need of thought); complete.

    There fore in this state of being what would they do?

    My only request is this: please stay on topic, consider your response before you post and actually read each reply thoroughly.

    Thanks,

    James

    1. tobey100 profile image59
      tobey100posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.  Need to know???

    2. profile image0
      A Texanposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      You would be better off asking this bunch which beer they prefer.I prefer Miller lite by the way.

      1. tobey100 profile image59
        tobey100posted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Good man!

    3. marinealways24 profile image59
      marinealways24posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I think religion tries to use a middle man "God" to go beyond consciousness to find their true selves. It doesn't take a middle man to find yourself. Maybe when someone truly finds themselves, they are then on another level of consciousness while being conscious. Maybe when a person finds themselves, they can then go beyond themselves.

    4. profile image61
      The Paulposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      And what would those limitations be?

      1. profile image0
        Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Paul, the question of topic:

        Therefore in this state of being what would they do?

        Thanks.

        1. profile image61
          The Paulposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Pretend we're not playing answer a question with a question:

          What would those limitations be?

          1. profile image0
            Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            the elements of thought with regard to a need, any given instance, consciousness/awareness of a thing within or pertaining to thought.

            1. profile image61
              The Paulposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Okay, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here and go forward with the assumption that was merely poorly worded and not gibberish.

              I don't agree logic suffers that limit.  Why do you think it does?

              1. profile image0
                Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                logic is a 'string' of thoughts complex or simple, passive or aggressive (answer/question). So no matter the 'length' of the string, it will always be subject to the need -which is any given instance of the thought, the awareness/consciousness aka the need-to-know.

                Better said, will always be conscious of its limitation because without the thought it has no need-to-know. So long as it has a need, it will always exist.

                1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                  Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  But we know there is a flustering which ably tells the truth making this not correct and in fact show your assertions to be false.

                  The NTK aka "over-bearing prophet," is a well proven fallacy according to self awareness.

                  All things - alive or dead-  KNOW this to be truth - it is proven beyond supra consciousness. Thus it is proven, thus it is shown.

                  Yea?

                  1. profile image0
                    Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Even in a state of supra consciousness or any consciousness, one is still limited to that awareness.
                    Thus limited to the thought (see above).
                    So long as there is consciousness/awareness of, there is limitation, there is a need to know.

    5. double_frick profile image81
      double_frickposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      is consciousness the awareness of the thoughts or is consciousness simply awareness?
      i believe it is the latter and do one can rise above the petty limitations of this 3rd dimensional plane of existence to an extent, but if one ceases to "think" in essence one would not "exist" and since that is not a possibility to not think would not be either.

      but i'm very open to discussion, i love vague philosophical conversations.

      thank you. smile

      1. profile image0
        Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Hello Double. Thank you for posting.
        the essence of thinking v. existence is a very interesting point.
        Because existing is not the same as being. Existing implies one partaking of a thing -such as thought- and being subject to it entirely -its length, depth, limitation. (i.e. I think, therefore I am). smile

    6. double_frick profile image81
      double_frickposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      would they not just.....BE?

    7. tantrum profile image60
      tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Nothing.
      there will be nothing to do.
      It would be like being a kind of god.
      Boring like Hell.

      1. profile image0
        Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Hi Tantrum, hope all is well.
        interesting you would mention: a god, which is a whole other thread thing. Care to elaborate -without debate?

        1. tantrum profile image60
          tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          There's nothing to elaborate. Not beyond consciousness.
          Anyway all those states of minds are only  mind games.

          There's nothing beyond our mind
          It's called Death.

          1. profile image0
            Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            i don't believe they are games per say, unless the original Atari tennis game applies.

            As for the nothing beyond our mind -how is that possible.
            There must be something beyond consciousness/thought. Else the sum & substance of the human brain/thought process is mute.
            The human brain's purpose is to be complete/full, lacking nothing/no information, enabling us to "be" instead of exist. This state of being is presently limited by our need to think, need to know.

            1. tantrum profile image60
              tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              And that's all there is to it.

              This thread is a mind game.
              that's all.
              Every thought put in action is a mind game.

              Our life is a mind game.
              You play mind games continually in your daily life.

              And I'm playing a mind game just by posting this.

              1. Jerami profile image77
                Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                   Hay Ms "T"  I think you just hit it on the head.
                    Mind games seems to be all there is ;  at least 99% of everything goin on where ever I have ever been.
                    So.... Who gets to decide who is crazy.

                1. tantrum profile image60
                  tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  lol
                  that's the question !
                  hi jerami ! smile

    8. sublimed profile image59
      sublimedposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      In that state of being, there would be no need to do anything.
      Being becomes bliss.

    9. shiva tattva profile image60
      shiva tattvaposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Yes.

      There are people truly refuse to accept the limitations of logic, ritual systems, what have you.

      They will also be awake someday.

      1. tantrum profile image60
        tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I f you think you're Awake, you're in your deepest 'Dream'

        1. Jerami profile image77
          Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              "Last night I dreamed I was a butterfly; or in truth am I realy a butterfly that is now dreaming that IT is a man"????
             Don't remember where I read that

  2. profile image0
    Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago

    Perhaps, I should clarify.

    The Need to Know - the state of awareness of a need to think or reason; consciousness; aware of a thought or sum of thoughts, which in some form or fashion a quest, desire, etc for knowledge.

    The NTK applies equally to any human -apart from religious or scientific or lack there of such beliefs/methods.

  3. profile image0
    A Texanposted 7 years ago

    Helloooooooo, Miller lite?

    1. profile image0
      Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      sorry Tex, only have Pilsner or Belgian White. Which is good for you? (might have a warm Bud from a frat party I was at about 20+ years ago. hehe)

      1. profile image0
        A Texanposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Gonna have to pass on the bud, oh well I'll look elsewhere.

  4. theirishobserver. profile image60
    theirishobserver.posted 7 years ago

    That was only when I done acid....

    1. profile image0
      Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Thank you Irish.
      Am an alkaline man myself.

      (ps, nice rooster)

  5. profile image0
    Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago

    let me go a little deeper and say this:

    consciousness is the awareness of a thought or need to think.

    "It is not necessary to consider a thought, a question nor its opponent, an answer. Both are relative parallels of the Need to Know, continuously limited to each other and the thought itself- which is their existence. For without the thought, neither exists or has purpose - especially with regard to purity"

    -this is an excerpt from a work I have been involved in for some years titled: An Application of Pure Consideration (the relationary parallels of the need to know)

    1. sublimed profile image59
      sublimedposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      It is possible to have consciousness without awareness.
      Animals have consciousness, but few are aware that they are conscious

  6. marcel285 profile image81
    marcel285posted 7 years ago

    Yeah the tools are all in our heads, most people just don't know how to use them. States of consciousness: (It is not black and white, nothing is):

    Delta: 0.5-3.5HZ
    Theta: 3.5-7HZ
    Alpha: 7-13 HZ
    Beta: 13-30 HZ
    Gamma: c.40HZ- 200 HZ

    Alpha is our normal state of consciousness. When the speed of thought increases to Beta, this is when religious people may think they can talk to god or whatever. But it is just a different state on consciousness to our usual one, we aren't all that familiar with it, so people contemplate reason.

    Few people will ever reach Gamma, that is a level where mental has potential to transform to physical. Most people will never realize, or believe what their braains are actually capable of.

    1. profile image0
      Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Hello Marcel.

      Nice frequencies.
      I have been told me myself sleep Theta.
      Most of the human population live in Beta -always going, going, going.
      Some even when they sleep.

      -but again, as aforementioned, any state of consciousness/awareness is a limitation. I suppose with the 5 brain frequencies, there is tons of awareness happening, lots of NTK.

  7. profile image0
    Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago

    Mark, one example used is pain.
    Pain is an alarm or awareness/consciousness that something is not correct. Compare thought to pain, they are quite identical.

    both are a consciousness/awareness.

    if there were no pain, there is no need for that consciousness.
    if there is no thought, there is no need for that either.

    so, to go beyond consciousness, would state that all thought is full, complete, without need. It was also state that humans then have or have had that ability at some point. Should this be the case, then we are in fact infinite, as the universe we live in.
    Though endlessly increasing, but always full, always complete, beyond need.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Pain? What is pain? Meaningless physical measurements. Supra consciousness allows you to deal with pain in ways never before imagined.

      There is no pain where the body cannot be damaged. Pain is a purely physical thing and applies only as a warning that damage is imminent.

      To be discarded once you have read my book, "Supra consciousness in just sixteen days or your old awareness back."

      1. profile image0
        Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        did you read the 1st post, Mark? just wondering.

        : any thought, is a limitation for it is a parallel of the NTK.
        : to need is to lack something, to be aware or conscious, thus the limitation.

        : the only certainty is that to be would require having no need, no awareness, no consciousness thus freeing oneself from the relationary parallels.

        : else, no matter the extent -depth, width, height or breadth of that parallel, one will always be subject & limited to it (i.e. existing, having imperfection, limitation, a lose of fullness, a need)

      2. profile image0
        Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        yours: http://www.supraconsciousnessnetwork.org/ ???
        there are over 2,000 books on the subject of supra con.

        course i prefer toyota supra. (j/k)

  8. profile image61
    The Paulposted 7 years ago

    Wow.

    1. profile image0
      Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      ???

  9. profile image60
    breakfast club.posted 7 years ago
  10. Cagsil profile image58
    Cagsilposted 7 years ago

    Lunacy.

    There is NOTHING beyond consciousness/awareness.

    The entire thought process is only realized because of consciousness/awareness of life.

    Consciousness/awareness is the highest value to life, in and of, itself.

    Everything the mind/brain comes up with for thoughts, is only because consciousness/awareness is already above and beyond the thought process.

    If there was no consciousness/awareness in a person, then they are either sleeping or dead.

    1. sublimed profile image59
      sublimedposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      If there is no awareness, there is no existence.
      Awareness exists beyond the brain.
      Consciousness moves to another state of being during sleep,
      consciousness moves to another state of being after death.

    2. profile image0
      Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Cags,

      1. you say there is nothing beyond consciousness. If so, there is no true purpose to living/life. all is mute, pointless.
      2. you say the entire thought process is realized BECAUSE of the consciousness -how is that possible- since the thought itself implies a need for awareness.
      3. If it is the highest value of life -in and of itself then why the need for processing the thought or having consciousness -everything would be 'zen', no need or lack of any kind. and it contradicts your first statement entirely.
      4. if the brain is just sending/receiving messages from that consciousness than thought is again controlling that consciousness.

      which makes consciousness/thought is a relationary parallel.

      1. sublimed profile image59
        sublimedposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        if I may...

        1. the purpose is to achieve higher states of consciousness. from this vantage point, thoughts become mute and pointless, not consciousness.
        2. awareness doesn't need thoughts. awareness precedes thought.
        3. the need to process thought is linked with our fallen state of consciousness and requires an in-depth discussion of cosmology for the answer  to be revealed.
        4. thoughts influence consciousness, they don't control it.

  11. profile image0
    Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago

    seems most are referring to the human condition, that is without thought, they would not 'be'. I cannot accept that as the totality of creation.

    if we -as a human being- are complete, lacking no knowledge or need to know, then we are beyond awareness/consciousness/need. for our brain would function effortlessly to perform those things we assume we 'need' to do, automatically.

    thus without need of logic/thinking would be free to be. That being is not a state of inaction, just the opposite -unlimited action: creation/creating.

    we are beyond meta physic, meta logic, or any such term.
    all are conscious, that i know of, as Marcel exampled by the 5 frequencies of the brain.

    our limitation is accepting the subjective, the awareness, the need to know.

  12. Jerami profile image77
    Jeramiposted 7 years ago

    Other than the need to know how to feed, cloth, shelter, protect ourselves, the need to know is little more than a small part of our prideful selves.
       Big difference between NEED and desire.
       Though I do admit that we need to desire.
      Just a thought.

    1. profile image0
      Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Hi Jerami. thank you for posting.
      I believe it humans at one time HAD a totality of thought -meaning they lacked nothing, were complete. Having all knowledge all of the things of creation.

      1. Jerami profile image77
        Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this
      2. Jerami profile image77
        Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

           You do have a point..   I'm goina think out loud again so pardon me when I sound crazy.
          As I have come through this portion of life It seems that with all of my intellectualizing has brought me back to my childish understanding. When all of our needs are met we are less prone to enter into self reflection of our own understanding. For me it seems to be that sanity is best maintained with acceptance of my not having to understand everything.
            To have the understanding of a child. Maybe that is closest to heaven and wisdom???.

        1. profile image0
          Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          spot on!
          precisely. our 'need to know' has all but limited us to actual understanding -which is beyond comprehension (or better stated completely understood). Hence, it is beyond consciousness/awareness/thought. It is purity.

  13. Cagsil profile image58
    Cagsilposted 7 years ago

    You are making more out of it than there needs to be. Hence, you ramble on repeating the same garbage. You portray to sound like you actually said something profound, yet you're talking yourself into circles.

    And, it's apparent that you started this thread, before you even thought it out yourself, because obvious you really don't understand it.

    Have a great day. smile

    1. profile image0
      Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      okay then. you too.

  14. Jerami profile image77
    Jeramiposted 7 years ago

    Again I'm thinking and talking at the same time so....??
    I think that we think too much.
      We examine "inteligence" to death.  Ya caint disect a bird  and find life.
        If ya think about it long enough to figure why ya want something, by the time that ya figure out why you want it ; it will have gone down the road, out of reach.
        And if we are not careful by the time we have finished building something we will not want that any more.
        In my mind in my own crazy way, this, is relative to what I have been reading. through out all of the threads lately.

  15. profile image0
    Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago

    I thoroughly agree, Jerami, it is very relative.


    now Paul, here is the 2nd part of the excerpt:

    "So, then we have a knowledge of things, full well accepting that awareness, being that consciousness and continuously thinking, as to keep at bay, purity. for purity needs nothing -in that it fully knows and therefore is exceedingly greater than thought and its parts. And being, that is the state or essence of purity provides  unlimited ability to be and to do for purposes beyond need, beyond consequence, beyond thought or the processes contained. Purity exceeds enlightenment -since enlightenment is also a form of consciousness/awareness and so limited to the parallel previous stated."

    "Now of Quality, though I am no expert, it appears that both sides of the house have come together -science and religion (classic and romantic, logic and sensation) to form a union, that which is called Quality (i.e. quality of life). And this newness inspires even more awareness and a belief that the purpose and pleasure of life is now complete, A New Age Philosophy perhaps? Even though they have removed the wall between and fashioned the roof of Quality, there remains much quarreling within. Which only manifests a deeper expression of the need to know for both. Still there is no purity....

    "One can see the conflict in approaching Purity, but so it must be. For Purity is not a thing to attain by that paralell, but is a thing already foreseen and is as a fullness of knowledge, lacking nothing, having everything. Thus, by any measure is infinite. As beings of human kind, we are then the expression of purity when we free ourselves from all consciousness; infinite when we disrobe ourselves of the veils of knowledge and accept our true nature, a creation of perfection, a manifestation of purity and one with purity itself."

    1. profile image61
      The Paulposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I might have made the effort to struggle through that...  Really, I do occasionally dig through religious mumbo-jumbo from time to time to make sure there isn't actually some coherent idea at the core of it I'm missing.

      But Mark saved me the effort.

      1. profile image0
        Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        why is it, that you ask me to engage you, yet you immediately walk away.
        remember, you stated we are merely chemical processes. when I rebutted, this engagement began and you challenged my perspective.

        now that the opportunity to display your savvy is wide open, you refuse -even so far as to hide behind another mans words. Thus strengthening my belief in the cowardice of both houses of Duality -the two lovers- science and religion.

        am I disappointed, yes.
        surprised, no.


        there is no new thought, only the three rhetoerics -project, reflect, absorb. The Limitation, the Need to Know.

        1. profile image61
          The Paulposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Hah!  You've been walking away from me for a week or more.  Indicates a lack of anything to say, wears on my patience.

          Now, when you finally ante'd up and tried to present your beliefs, Mark destroyed you.  Did a good job if it too.  It was a little bit nasty, but faster and more concise than I could have done, and after all your evasion and obscurantism, it's good enough for me.

          1. profile image0
            Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            yada yada yada, Paul.

            'you people' just crow to hear yourselves crow.
            for all your ideology, you have yet to substantiate a full and complete dialog of your 'hocus pocus', be it under the guise of discovery by experiment or discovery by fate. I have clearly stated by points -repeatedly, true- and not once have you thoroughly examined them. In no way have I been evasive, nor do I have reason to.
            Seems your logic has failed you, again.
            what's most disheartening is still you hide behind another man's words -correct or not to make yourself 'appear' victorious in your own eyes.

            How does it feel to always sit on the porch, eh?

            Tex was right....miller light.

            1. profile image60
              (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

              The crow will do so when the duck is quacking.

  16. profile image0
    lyricsingrayposted 7 years ago

    as you requested, staying on topic, I have no clue what your talking about nor what your asking for. Now because my head hurts I am taking aspirin with a glass of rum.  Thank you for this interesting thread.

    1. profile image0
      Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Hi Lyrics, thank you. most appreciated.
      Enjoy the rum -too sweet for me.

  17. profile image0
    Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago

    That said -though not entirely for lack of pages here- I return to my original statement:

    ...in this state of being ( that is: purity )what would they do?

    1. Jerami profile image77
      Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

         I think...In its pure form, thought would be for food, shelter and companionship. An Indian summer type of day and a rock to lie on. And in summer a creek to swim in.
          There would be no need for calculus or geometry.
         Overly simplistic answer but I'm tired

  18. kess profile image60
    kessposted 7 years ago

    Being aware that we know all things and we are all things is the highest state of consciousness.

    Therefor our knowing, being, awareness, consciousness are all one and of the same and is the Mind, the I am.

    The mind then processes the knowing which we define as thoughts and is thinking.

    This knowing precedes us for they first reside within Him who begat us. And we rightfully regard these thoughts as foreknowledge.

    The processes of  thinking begins from either the knowing or the lack thereof.

    When there is a lacking in the knowing there is the "need to know". And that need can be satisfied from the all knowing self.

    Or we may also seek to know from other sources, because we are not yet aware of the all knowing self.

    The key therefore is to be aware of the all knowing self.

    The one thing that hinders the that awareness of the all knowing self is the thought which the mind contemplates.

    There are thoughts which can hinders or benefit the all knowing.

    Since the all knowing contains and is the realization of all things, the thoughts that then is beneficcial to all things are also beneficial to the all knowing.

    And if the all knowing would contemplate on the things that are not beneficial to all things, then the all knowing also hinders itself.

    Putting away these thoughts are referred to as repentance.

    The all knowing first perceive itself as hindered and contained because of it's ever present body.

    But by realisation of itself it will without fail will continuously embark upon ridding itself of the body's limitations.

    This is why it is not necessary to tell the sons of God "do not sin" for they of themselves already knows and understand the the limitation of sin and to take thought "not  sinning" is contemplating sin itself.

    Consider then this, if we be given that infinite capacity to be all knowing, and in us all things and crowned us with the title god.

    Who then is He of whom we call Father?
    What title can we bestow upon Him?   

    If we then seek to know this All Knowing Father, we are then also get a revelation of Ourself.

    And by Him We know that there are Thoughts we should contemplate, for they are all Good for the all in All.
    And thoughts it is good that we repent from contemplating.

    If we take thought of these individual thoughts, they are then evil to the all in All.

    But if we repent from the run total of all of them. They are them good for to the all in All.

    I can say it this way again, if the darkness reside within the mind, then it will destroy the mind.
    But if the mind reject the darkness, it can then be tree for it's benefit.

    In that way all things are good.

  19. skyfire profile image72
    skyfireposted 7 years ago

    James, i can say no to this. I mean call me skeptical but i refuse to accept that the knowledge is complete. Even science works on falsification and verification. So any path that says complete knowledge is quack, there is no such thing as full knowledge on this planet that human mind can digest.

    In between, I'll keep track of this thread for some of your views.

    1. profile image0
      Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Hi again, Sky.
      What I am aiming at is: the human being actually knows everything it needs to. When we 'realize/become conscious/aware of' any given instance, what is occurring is not a revelation but simply the brain re-activating that dormant thought process.

      In so far as to say "full", yes. I can support that notion because it suggests that we are more than simple vessels of collective energy 'searching' aimlessly and blindly for 'the truth' of what our lives represent.

      ps, thank you for expressing your opinion.

      1. Mark Knowles profile image60
        Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Wow - that is the first time you have said anything clearly.

        But - you are mostly wrong. A human being does not know everything it needs to given the environment we currently inhabit.

        Nor has it done for a very long time. In fact - actually this is more an "educated guess," - we have not done so since we became conscious and needed to learn some of the things we need to know from our parents/caregivers/elder members of the tribe.

        We do not inherently "know" for example that cars are dangerous. We need to learn that. On the other hand we do inherently know that Tigers are and will know that instinctively.

        Things changing and moving as fast as they do - I doubt the inherent knowledge will ever catch up, but it is a shame most of us choose to ignore the inherent knowledge and instead transfer it to religion or a belief in god instead.

        1. profile image0
          Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Hello Mark.

          I can see your point.
          Yet, even though we 'learn' that instance seems to be just an activation of a thought, series of thoughts already in place.
          I suppose if it were watered down, instinct would be the acceptable consideration.

          Interesting enough, you mention man made objects (cars, etc) which 'creates' a secondary NTK system with the human brain. In essence man 'creating' an additional consciousness (i.e. creating JavaScript from COBOL).

          Interesting points indeed.

  20. profile image0
    lyricsingrayposted 7 years ago

    kill the thread already it has no meaning or we could just keep hijacking it.

  21. Jerami profile image77
    Jeramiposted 7 years ago

    It seems to me that too many people are overly anxious to chastise another that they jump on tiny issues of someone else's statement and because of this  they miss the whole context of the statement.

    1. profile image60
      (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Sorry Jerami, when the parts are faulty, the whole is questionable. So, it is the parts that require clarification, not the whole.

      1. Jerami profile image77
        Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          And if we could all examine ourselves with that same scrutiny
        we would find ourselves faulty. And thus we should all question ourselves with a finer toothed comb.
           The world will never become a better place by attempting to "FIX" other people. 
           The best way to improve the world is to fix myself.
           When people start doing that, we can all agree upon a common goal.

        1. profile image60
          (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Then, the author of the OP has much work to do.

  22. Jerami profile image77
    Jeramiposted 7 years ago

    Some people jump at every opportunity to enter into argument. What does that say about that person??

    1. profile image60
      (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      They are inquisitive and wish to understand completely.

      1. Jerami profile image77
        Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

           I remember when I was a Child and interrupted conversations between my parents and Grandparents I was often told that If I would "Hide and listen" I would learn the answers to my curiosity much faster.  And sometimes not.
           And that I was not ready to understand some of those answers.

        1. profile image60
          (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Funny, I was always encouraged to ask questions and think.

          Sorry to hear that, Jerami.

          1. Jerami profile image77
            Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

               Don't feel sory for me.  If you had been told to "hide and watch or listen" when you were younger; You might have recieved the answers to your questions before now.

            1. profile image60
              (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

              No, I would just be ignorant, then, and would swallow anything anyone told me.

              Sound familiar?

  23. profile image0
    Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago

    Jerami,

    it says they are overly self absorbed and argumentative.
    Never mind 'curious' or even 'inquisitive'. Because to inquire is to ask relevant questions, as well as, substantiate relevant responses.

    All I see in these threads is the same 5 or 10 persons crowing and squawking, yet never actually fully listening and making thorough responses.

    it's like recess for 'adults'. Let's pick on this or that so we don't have to actually explain ourselves without pointing fingers of injecting selfish notions.

    a sad fact...

    1. profile image60
      (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      And, one person quacking.

      1. profile image0
        Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        sory, Q, did not mean to exclude you.

  24. Jerami profile image77
    Jeramiposted 7 years ago

    I was always told that I can learn nothing while my mouth is moving.

    1. Cagsil profile image58
      Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      And, whomever told you that, wasn't doing you any favors. Because, one has to move their mouth, before learning can begin, such as asking questions. smile

      Just a thought. smile

      1. Jerami profile image77
        Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

         
           We have to know when and where and to who to ask questions.
        What good is a question when we do not consider the where,when, and who?  We learn nothing from the question. We learn when we listen and attempt to understand the answer. We do not have to agree with the answer in order to learn from it.
            It is sometimes not necessary to understand WHAT to do, but more important to know what NOT to do.
            And again there is no knowledge received when the mouth is moving; but in the hearing.

           And if remaining ignorant unless you get to choose the lesson is your choice, then so be it.

          Twenty one days.. I see your point about all consciousness is sin, and it is a good one.
          But I think  that consciousness "MAY have had" two paths, and few took the path less traveled. We may not be aware of this because those have already arrived at a diffrent destination than the one we are moving towards?
           Just thinking out loud again. I do that a lot.
        Sometimes I say things doing that that I wish I could take back.
           
          I really do have to go now but will check back in later.

    2. profile image60
      (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      So, what HAVE you learned by not asking questions?

  25. profile image0
    Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago

    Jerami, considering your life experiences, I would gather you have learned much, even beyond questions. Here's to you.

    Sometimes -well in most cases all times- it is better not to ask questions and learn than to ask questions that continue infinitely, bringing no fullness of understanding.

    as i said at the beginning of this thread, any type of 'awareness/consciousness/thinking/knowledge' is a limitation.

    -As you and I both believe- because I cannot speak for the others-

    "Adam became 'conscious/aware/realized' he was naked after listening to the barrage of question/suggestion/ideas of his character/true nature and accepting it as truth.

    As a result, he became a slave to his thoughts and the action/reaction of them (consequence).

    Before that, he was 'above' consciousness -he was righteous.
    so, in all truth, all consciousness is sin.
    all understanding is righteousness, fullness, pure.

  26. profile image0
    Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago

    enjoy the day, Jerami!


    Now, I would like to continue by adding a second note.

    We can agree that pain is an awareness that something is wrong with our bodies. Pain is an awareness/a consciousness/ a collection of thoughts.

    What interests me is this: the items in question or better said, the elements of 'pain' -being the collective strings of that thought/awareness- ALREADY were there, before we had the instance where that thought manifested/activated (i.e. we 'felt' the pain). This opens me to affirm that the human brain contains everything it needs-to-know.


    I welcome your feedback.

  27. profile image0
    lyricsingrayposted 7 years ago

    I like sex and candy big_smile

    Hijacked-little while ago I guess hmm:

  28. earnestshub profile image87
    earnestshubposted 7 years ago

    Beyond consciousness lies the sub conscious, the source of all knowingness.
    The more that is sub conscious bought into consciousness, the more we can know.
    Experiments and empirical evidence about the subconscious would indicate vast resources. smile

 
working