Kevin's Watch

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2005 10:46 am**

We create the meaning obviously. Which makes it different for everybody. And "command" has too many negative connotations for me to accept.

A Commander-->Commands-->The Commanded

No good for me.

--A

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2005 12:07 pm**

I once asked the question "If a technology was developed that could prove to everyone beyond a reasonable doubt that ghosts exist, how would it effect your beliefs?" Would it spark a belief in God? Would you grant that there are other planes of existence? Other dimensions? Afterlife? Heaven?

I personally have a belief that there is more to the universe than what we are able to perceive with our natural senses. Humans are so wrong about so many things so much of the time that it seems a little reckless to insist that anything is absolutely certain.
"There are always possibilities."

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:59 pm**

Very, very well put, Tom.

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2005 10:06 pm**

Avatar wrote:We create the meaning obviously. Which makes it different for everybody. And "command" has too many negative connotations for me to accept.

A Commander-->Commands-->The Commanded

No good for me.

--A

Oooohhhh.....it's "obviously" now, is it?

How can one "disobey" the "command" to live? And cannot "discovery" also hold different meanings for the individual?

(yes, good post, aTOMic.

)

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2005 10:26 pm**

The Esmer wrote: How can one "disobey" the "command" to live?

What about suicude?

The Esmer wrote: And cannot "discovery" also hold different meanings for the individual?

It certainly can, by one interpreting their discoveries, and assigning their own meaning to that discovery, in essence, supplying their own meaning.
Command as Avatar alluded to, also implies a Commander, no? Not all of us are sure of that Commander. Therefore, unless the command comes from within, there is no command.

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2005 10:34 pm**

"There is no spoon"

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2005 10:45 pm**

Am I being fooled, then?

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2005 10:55 pm**

"That depends, do you think you're being fooled?"

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2005 11:05 pm**

"Only if there really is a spoon."

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2005 11:15 pm**

"Do you think there really is a spoon?"

We do this Matrix-speak all day at work. Gaaad I hated those movies.....

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2005 11:18 pm**

"Do I need a spoon if I think I need a spoon?"

The 1ist and 2nd were good...but the 3rd sucked, IMO.

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2005 11:25 pm**

ur-bane wrote:
The Esmer wrote: How can one "disobey" the "command" to live?
What about suicude?

Exactly. The only way to stop living is to disobey the command to live with your own counter-command to die.

The Esmer wrote: And cannot "discovery" also hold different meanings for the individual?
It certainly can, by one interpreting their discoveries, and assigning their own meaning to that discovery, in essence, supplying their own meaning.
Command as Avatar alluded to, also implies a Commander, no? Not all of us are sure of that Commander. Therefore, unless the command comes from within, there is no command.

You had no choice to live, you were simply commanded to by whatever force issued that command. I use command, you may use any term you wish to signify something you are doing that you yourself did not have a choice in at its beginning. And you used the magic word, "interpret", if life is not "interpreted" it is simply "perceived", therefore not allowing any variation as to it's "meaning", or "purpose". This means that when you interpret, you are replacing the existing "meaning", with one of your own that was "interpreted" from the "original" meaning.

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2005 11:32 pm**

The Esmer wrote:And you used the magic word, "interpret", if life is not "interpreted" it is simply "perceived", therefore not allowing any variation as to it's "meaning", or "purpose". This means that when you interpret, you are replacing the existing "meaning", with one of your own that was "interpreted" from the "original" meaning.

That's an incredibly astute observation.

There is a tremendous gulf between perception and interpretation.

Posted: **Tue Oct 04, 2005 11:58 pm**

Thank you Cail. I like you better here.....

Posted: **Wed Oct 05, 2005 8:17 am**

The Esmer wrote:And you used the magic word, "interpret", if life is not "interpreted" it is simply "perceived", therefore not allowing any variation as to it's "meaning", or "purpose". This means that when you interpret, you are replacing the existing "meaning", with one of your own that was "interpreted" from the "original" meaning.

Well, I like that, and I can accept your use of the word command for lack of a better one. But I think that all meaning resides in the interpretation. That interpretation creates that meaning, and doesn't just replace an original meaning with itself. In other words, there is no original meaning. There is something to be perceived, but perception and interpretation are inseperable.

--A

Posted: **Wed Oct 05, 2005 9:14 am**

Avatar wrote:
The Esmer wrote:And you used the magic word, "interpret", if life is not "interpreted" it is simply "perceived", therefore not allowing any variation as to it's "meaning", or "purpose". This means that when you interpret, you are replacing the existing "meaning", with one of your own that was "interpreted" from the "original" meaning.
Well, I like that, and I can accept your use of the word command for lack of a better one. But I think that all meaning resides in the interpretation. That interpretation creates that meaning, and doesn't just replace an original meaning with itself. In other words, there is no original meaning. There is something to be perceived, but perception and interpretation are inseperable.

--A

That's exactly what I am saying, as well, Av. A Command to live cannot exist without a Commander.
Esmer, you used the word "discovery." An individual making a discovery ("perception" can replace discovery because we are speaking in terms of individual observation) needs to and will interpret that discovery(perception). Hence the use of "interpretation." We all know we can perceive the same event, and all interpret it differently. That perception then has different meaning to each individual. And that in no way confirms/denies an original meaning.

Posted: **Wed Oct 05, 2005 12:43 pm**

Not only needs to and will, but cannot help but apply that interpretation.

--A

Posted: **Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:37 pm**

Avatar had it right: we create our own meaning. Nietzsche may have been accused of being an absolute nihilist, but this is a mischaracterization. For him, nihilism was merely a transition stage between rejecting the worldview of Christian absolutism to one of choosing one's own values and meaning.

On the "command," issue, Heidegger describes our condition as "thrown." We are thrown into this life, this world, this being. We had no choice in being here, but we have a choice whether to live authentically and to stay.

Posted: **Thu Oct 06, 2005 7:15 am**

The Doors wrote:...Into this world we're thrown...

Good post Malik

--A

Posted: **Thu Oct 06, 2005 8:49 am**

Avatar wrote:
The Esmer wrote:And you used the magic word, "interpret", if life is not "interpreted" it is simply "perceived", therefore not allowing any variation as to it's "meaning", or "purpose". This means that when you interpret, you are replacing the existing "meaning", with one of your own that was "interpreted" from the "original" meaning.
Well, I like that, and I can accept your use of the word command for lack of a better one. But I think that all meaning resides in the interpretation. That interpretation creates that meaning, and doesn't just replace an original meaning with itself. In other words, there is no original meaning. There is something to be perceived, but perception and interpretation are inseperable.

--A

meaning = intent, no? intent = driving force, no? to discern the intent one can merely observe it, without interpreting it.(the wind? the sun?) perceive = observe = discover.

Interpreting requires thought, an action, while perceiving requires only awareness.

Awareness also does not require thought, nor does it require perception.

Awareness in a void has nothing to perceive, as perceive is defined as an action, and before action is non-action, which cannot be defined as the act of not acting. the non-action before the act of perception is awareness.

Awareness is a state, but is also an action, an act of intent. Another seeming paradox. Awareness only requires intent, or a driving force, and energy. It is an important, nay crucial, distinction between regarding intent as a force, and intent as a thought. A thought is an interpretation. The same distinction must be made between regarding perception as an act of awareness, and as a result of interpretation. Perception is an act of awareness, while interpretation is an act of perception, not the result of perception, in this case.

An interpretation requires a shared value, and as we have no shared value to interpret the intent of the universe, we can only observe it, without interpreting it, hence "pure perception", or "direct observation", or "intial discovery", the exact single moment that perception occurs, before interpretation.

Intent requires energy, and also is considered energy, since it itself is a "driving force". This is considered a "paradox", or better yet, "The Paradox". Energy requires intent requires energy. Irreducible complexity, or as I prefer, Irreducible Residue, the last verifiable components of Reality are energy and intent, which are of and is the same.

Regarding command to live, you are forced to live, and as such must oppose that force to die. You cannot decide to live, you can only decide to die. Saying you decide to live only means that you have decided not to die. Death is also a command that is not dependent upon your will, for it is the natural order of life, and you will die one day despite your best effort to avoid it. Left unhindered, beyond your will, you must live, and you must die, because life itself commands it so.