It cannot be unlimited. It is woefully limited even in the most enlightened of people. That is why it makes little to sense to take literally anything written by man (such as books in the Bible or The Qur'an), or said by man (such as most things politicians say).
It can *feel* unlimited in certain forms of meditation, and maybe the mind can "unite" with the universe, or with God (in Christian meditative practice), but no person's mind is limitless.
Absolutes are usually dangerous, but there are some almost-always absolutes -- common decency is important, for example; slapping a child across the face is wrong; abusing pets is wrong; nature deserves our respect; we must begin from the assumption that all people have rights. These are more-or-less absolutes. We can't prove their truth, but I don't think we need to.
How can you say you know that no mind is limitless when you don't have everyones mind? I agree with you on some of those common sense absolutes you proposed. When you say absolutes are dangerous, how do you know it's not dangerous to think you have a limited mind as being absolute when you can't logically map it's limits?
I know my mind is limited. So I am assuming everyone else's is too. I've never met anyone whose mind seemed to be limitless. The Dalai Lama certainly does not seem to have a limitless mind; or Leonard Cohen (they both spent years meditating, hence my use of them as examples )
It's the most limiting of the options you suggest. Evolution is open-ended, it could theoretically be disproved, and in any case it is not a theory of the beginning of the universe, or even of earth. to believe in both sounds pretty open, if you can work it. To believe in neither I guess is pretty damn open too, unless you believe we all just showed up yesterday and all your memories and knowledge are fantasies -- which would be pretty friggin' limiting
I agree with you that it is pretty open to believe in both. Do you think both should be believed as absolute or do you think it would be limiting? I think believing in neither would not be a belief of absolutes, but I don't know which is more limiting.
I think believing in Genesis is limiting. The difference is that, in theory, someone could come along in a hundred years and say -- I've got proof there were no dinosaurs -- and if he/she has proof, they have to revise their picture of the past; that's freakin' open-ended. No-one is going to come along and say -- Noah's Flood, no it never happened, and then all literalist Muslims/Jews/Christians will revise their views. Can't happen; doesn't make sense.
I feel the we set barriers on our minds. They are capable of retaining vast amounts of information and comprehending anything, however, there are mental blocks we institute in ourselves that limit what we can sanely understand.
I think it is more limiting to the mind to believe in evolution ... an easy out (though I believe in evolution, I also believe in a higher being). Where creation, God, and whatnot is so vast, limitless ideas on how the earth came to be, who the higher being is, etc, that there is only so much our minds can handle with that information before that mental block comes up and says ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
Same for absolutes, we need to believe in absolutes because thinking of no absolutes is too much to fully comprehend!
Not sure if anyone gets what I am attempting to put into words here, but there you go!
I agree that we set barriers. I think the first barrier is assuming our minds are limited. I do think those blocks can be overcome in logical thought or even faithful thought. Lol I completely agree with you that the "what if's" can nearly drive a person to insanity if anyone was ever really sane to begin with. Maybe there could be no such thing as "too much to comprehend"? Great thoughts, thanks.
Well it was an excellent topic choice, Marinealways. The human mind is an interesting thing to comprehend, many people fall short in their assumptions of what they're exactly capable of accomplishing.
Like I always told my brothers...I do not believe in smart or stupid people. There are only those who are willing to unlock and focus their minds on improving them, where others are content to just use their "generic" mindsets. Smart people are only smart because we have struggled to overcome our natural mental barriers.
(And no, I'm not being cocky in thinking I am smart. I know I am intelligent, just not super so) :-D
Thanks. I agree, I think many people limit themselves or allow others to limit them. I do believe we are all ignorant in something and I think we are all hypocritical or have been in the past. I think what separates the intelligent from the others are the ones that are content in their faults compared to the ones that are always trying to improve. I think a lot of people place generalizations on others based on education level, salary, or title as well when all are irrelevant. I agree, barriers are meant to be busted. Thanks.
I think it can be stretched by religious mysticism, though. All religions have this tradition ( I once heard that Islam was in fact spread in the form of the Sufi tradition, chiefly; don't know if it's true). And it often stands in contrast to dogmatism
Oh no! Wales is the land that adopted me and I love it, but the language is quite another matter. I go to Welsh class for two hours each week but the mutilations (errr mutations) are still defeating me. I translate exclusively in the medical/pharma field out of Croatian, Serbian, Slovenian, Polish, French, German and Spanish into English.
Having just had a tete-a-tete (if you'll pardon the pun) with a fellow translator, also on this thread, I am reminded of how few of the world's Americans/Brits/Aussies, heck, even English-speaking Canadians, know more than one language. Given how many languages there are, how can the mind be limitless.
Then I think of how many works there are in philosophy. How many concepts, how many schools of thought. And each time you go back to them, you say -- mmmmm, ohhhh, ahhhh, I never saw that before.
I mean, come on, maybe there are some limitless minds out there, but without some super hardcore education, good luck even coming close to attaining it.
Conversely, it is super dangerous to think of limitless mind *without* hardcore education. If more Americans had more education, then perhaps you wouldn't have ended up in Iraq (I take that back; those neo-cons didn't care what any of you thought either way).
I'm not being rude. There are plenty of ignorant Brits too (my native country). But be very careful thinking you can expand your mind without some hardcore education -- most of us would fail even a first year logic course at university, let's face it
lol you are making comparisons and generalizations based on faith, not logic. What is hardcore education? A person can educate themselves on and individual level as much if not more than public education. Then you are making a generalization that Americans are uneducated for the acts of government and politicians, not very logical statements. Thanks
Is space the human limiting factor?Every species has something that limits it, whether it be predators, available shelters, amount of food available, etc., except, seemingly, humans. Could it be that space is the only...
<link snipped>The forementioned link is one example of how Hubpages needs to lift its limitations on the amount of text that someone is able to provide in their feedback to answering questions within questions on...
Aren't conventional beliefs in God limiting, even immature in outlook? Isn't God beyond beliefs,judgments & other human associated characteristics propagated by Abrahamic religions? Why are some humans...