Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
MikeL
Trad climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2014 - 11:52am PT
|
MH2:
I've read a couple of Slingerland's books on effortless action. They are worth reading to understand the academic side of wu wei and Confucius' "Analects," but I found myself thinking very often how Slingerland tends to get all balled-up academically within the topics. Wu wei can be well characterized as "trying not to try," but that hardly helps anyone. But if it is something you want to explain to someone else definitively, you'll just fail. That is the main outcomes of the 3 books he's written on the subject. Wu wei, or effortless action, is not something you can understand intellectually or definitively. It's not an analytical knowledge that you can learn. It's not even something that you can do. It's more a label for a state of being, and out of the state of being, things just get done (e.g., "effortless action").
All academics or people who try to explain "spiritual experiences" find themselves failing and lying because they can't tell the truth. No one can. Confucius, Laozi, Mencius, Zhuangzi, and the Xunzi all took different views of Wu Wei and attempted to teach it differently. Even D.T. Suzuki, HHDL, and other great masters cannot do anything other than vaguely point. It's always up to you. Each of us is ultimately our own guru in the end.
Slingerland's books are fine. But they can't get you anywhere but someplace else in your mind.
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2014 - 12:23pm PT
|
Funny thing about Fruity"s vid,
In Tyson"s argument for linear logical mathematical thinking opposed to Senses. Right at about 2 minutes into the film, Tyson looses train of thought and reckons he should have been a Playwright instead of a Mathematician. Did anyone else see the irony in that?
Tyson starts out insinuating that all mankind started out in Africa and evolved to "invent math". The oldest recordings by Man we have today prove we were thinking about "math" some 5-10 Thousand yrs ago. Keeping track of trade, and the number of days and seasons, to name a few. But we didn't "invent math" as much as we INVENTED Language. One "symbol" plus another "symbol" equals a third "symbol", and so on. We merely WITNESSED the methods in Nature and "called" them something. Obviously the Math was there all the time! And we are still WITNESSING today, only down narrower, and out broader. For one to see to these horizons, one must follow a long chronicled list of "symbols" to become aware of Natures Truths. Each so-called "invention" is merely the uncovering by man of the next evolutionary step in the lineary line of that progression. IF we are maybe inventing anything, we are inventing OURSELVES! The more Symbols and information we fill our Brains with, the more mature our sense of how we feel on any given situation, or idea.
For ALL the stored symbols and information in Tyson's head. He still can't help sensing the creative feeling in writing music..
Maybe does the wealth of information lead to a wealth of creativity?
Or does a wealth of creativity lead to a wealth of information?
Mh2's link to "trying not to try" seems to be the opposite view of that of Tyson's. Funny again.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2014 - 01:25pm PT
|
"The oldest recordings by Man we have today prove we were thinking about "math" some 5-10 Thousand yrs ago. Keeping track of trade, and the number of days and seasons, to name a few. But we didn't "invent math" as much as we INVENTED Language. One "symbol" plus another "symbol" equals a third "symbol", and so on. We merely WITNESSED the methods in Nature and "called" them something. Obviously the Math was there all the time! And we are still WITNESSING today, only down narrower, and out broader. For one to see to these horizons, one must follow a long chronicled list of "symbols" to become aware of Natures Truths. Each so-called "invention" is merely the uncovering by man of the next evolutionary step in the lineary line of that progression. IF we are maybe inventing anything, we are inventing OURSELVES! The more Symbols and information we fill our Brains with, the more mature our sense of how we feel on any given situation, or idea."
Perhaps your keenest post on these subjects ever.
Perhaps copy it, print it out and hang it on a wall!
|
|
MH2
climber
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2014 - 02:03pm PT
|
According to the radio interview I listened to, Slingerland explores wu-wei from 4 different angles in his book, each of which contradicts the others, which is probably as close as you can get to trying not to try.
It was funny hearing Slingerland admit that when driving he is FAR away from wu-wei, and explains that he comes from a part of New Jersey where Eastern influence is not in much evidence.
|
|
go-B
climber
Cling to what is good!
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2014 - 02:12pm PT
|
Psalm 90:12 So teach us to number our days,
That we may gain a heart of wisdom.
Matthew 6:27 Which of you by worrying can add one cubit to his stature?
Matthew 6:33 But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you.
...it adds up!
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2014 - 02:16pm PT
|
Perhaps your keenest post on these subjects ever.
Perhaps copy it, print it out and hang it on a wall!
Thank You!
Perhaps it's your most positively reinforced post towards anyone here?
Perhaps you should hang it on the wall?
Jus play'in, Lets keep it up!
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
Colorado
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2014 - 04:56pm PT
|
Lisa and I visited an origami exhibit at Bellevue Art Museum--and thought of you and your work in visual mathematics (or whatever I should call it) (MikeL)
Thanks, Mike. Those are lovely forms. A colleague of mine, Wolf Thron, did wood carving as a hobby for many years and produced some beautiful artworks using topological ideas for models.
Concerning the discussion of math, it's interesting that a few of the word problems still published today in algebra texts actually have their origins in antiquity. For instance: two workers hoe a field with one taking ten hours by himself and the other taking seven hours by himself, how long will it take for both to hoe the field working simultaneously? This problem has been discovered engraved in cuneiform on clay tablets dating many thousands of years ago. What's equally interesting is that a week or so ago, Marilyn vos Savant, who writes a column for newspapers and is regarded as one of the world's smartest women, was asked about a simple version of this problem: her "solution" was wrong. Although it was close, as Largo says, "No cigar!"
Tyson is not a mathematician (I haven't watched the videos HFCS posted), although he has undoubtedly used lots of math in his studies. To a mathematician the expression "linear mathematics" is not the same as "the linear nature of mathematics." And this linear nature appears after much non-linear thought - trial and error sort of stuff - when the results are written up for publication.
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2014 - 05:04pm PT
|
It was funny hearing Slingerland admit that when driving he is FAR away from wu-wei,
There's something funny about when we are in the heart of experience, seeing, sensing, reacting. We either repel/rebel and say "Fuc You" to intersecting Qualia, like he did when getting cut off. Or one takes the opposite road and attracts/adheres/admits by saying, "you go first".
Much of what determines either/or outcome in the heat of experience is our Mood. How we feel towards said experiences justification. If we feel we were "wronged" we intuitively repel then rebel with a "fuc you". Is THIS Opposition/Attraction the Nature of Man? Is it at the heart of Nature? Nature shows us that an equilibrium of positive/negative poles warrants for a stable and harmonious environment. Not to much or not to little of gravity,light,darkness,water, dryness,nutrients,exercise,etc. provide an opportune environment for growing plants. And Nature has corresponded this equilibrium without thinking? Without concern to the future; Without projecting "what if's" about tomorrows. Doesn't She just work by Sensing?
Man has choice between two paths. And will feel directly/indirectly the outcome from that decision. We all learn that if we strive along with a positive outcome, we flow with our environment and prosper and grow. But when we show negativity, we cause "speed bumps", or "walls".
Wo-Wei, Zen, Meditations, Religions, etc., Man-made self antiquated ritual methods of Equilibrium may in fact bring a more harmonious walk in this life to some extent.
Now i would like to introduce Scientific method/proof for The Teachings of Jesus providing Everlasting Life. Jesus/God taught that by forgiving a "negative" action like "when we are wronged" instead of saying "fuc you", and in a manner we are murdering it in our mind. By "forgiving" it, aren't we rationally admitting/accepting the negative action, and instead of killing it by way of justification. Humbly we allow a Pardon through the common sense of Love. And instead of a Law abiding sentence of death to the negativity, it becomes a positive through self-sacrifice and continues to live on.
Jesus declared, "The greatest sign of Love you can show is by laying down your own life for that of another."
i don't see or sense self-sacrifice anywhere in Nature. As a matter of fact it could be anti-evolutionary. Maybe thats why we find it so hard to Forgive?
|
|
pb
Sport climber
Sonora Ca
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2014 - 07:14pm PT
|
Who wants to know?
|
|
MH2
climber
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2014 - 07:19pm PT
|
"Deed, sah, dey ain't nobody hyah 'ceptin' us chickens."
|
|
MikeL
Trad climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2014 - 07:27pm PT
|
MH2: . . . 4 different angles in his book, each of which contradicts the others, which is probably as close as you can get to trying not to try.
You may have misunderstood.
There was a vacillation back and forth in thinking about whether one could or should try from Confucius, to Laozi, to Mencius, to Zhangzi, to Xunzi. Confucius said trying was adhering to proper ritualistic behaviors on how to do anything and everything (e.g., how deeply one should bow to a superior, what kind of music is proper to listen to), whereas Laozi said that any ritualistic act would be artificial and not true. Confucius said that one could polish or hone oneself to wu wei. Laozi (and Michelanglo), on the other hand, said that perfection was inherent in any substance: one simply needed to get rid of what was unnecessary (mainly elaborations). The ideas of Mencius, Zhangzi, and Xunzi tried to find some middle ground back and forth, but they all ended up taking one side over the other. Hence, the apparent dilemma / paradox.
Look, you've probably experienced the essence of the idea of wu wei many times in your life, although you've not thought about it as such. You've practiced certain behaviors (manners, climbing, martial arts, standing up and walking to a door, riding a bicycle, playing a musical instrument), that became second nature to you (automatic, intuitive, unconscious) and hence you did it perfectly according to your nature when you needed to. But the more you begin to think about the very action, the more uncoordinated, inelegant, the less ease you experience while doing whatever it is. You can't "try" to do it perfectly. Perfection shows up when you are centered, when your mind is at ease, when you have the right attitude (as it were).
It's only when a person tries to explain, define, or document how such "perfections" can show-up that they lose access to authentic expressions (otherwise known as "presence"). It is being itself that becomes expressed--the perfect expression, or the perfect action that is the expression of being.
All sensations (qualia), movement, and even thinking itself as thinking that are like that. It is experience as experience, without the content. It can't be said.
The objective of all these writers (to include Slingerland) was to find the basis for ethics--a basis for virtue that is self-validating and self-verifying: The Tao.
|
|
MikeL
Trad climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2014 - 07:45pm PT
|
I should also add, . . . .
It seems to me that all rituals (to include all religious rituals) are properly seen and experienced as meditations. And we all have and use them. We use rituals to clear our minds of everyday useless chatter to prepare for something significant. Look at what you do before you climb, before mow the lawn, before you cook a good meal, before you have one of those talks with your children, before you write something important, before you meet for a performance review . . . you're getting yourself ready for what's coming. And the best way to get ready for what is coming (or what you think is coming) is to clear your mind of irrelevant chatter and errant emotions. You focus. That focusing is meditation.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
Colorado
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2014 - 08:00pm PT
|
. . . became second nature to you (automatic, intuitive, unconscious) and hence you did it perfectly according to your nature when you needed to. But the more you begin to think about the very action, the more uncoordinated, inelegant, the less ease you experience while doing whatever it is. You can't "try" to do it perfectly (ML)
I'm recalling gymnastics from 55 years ago when I worked the still rings. It's true of course that when you begin a routine your mind clears automatically and your "second nature" takes over. When I didn't perform as well as expected I would think about correcting an error or slip, then I would will myself to do better, right before getting back on the apparatus - at which point there was no logical thought, but the willing - just prior to getting on the rings - was very important and usually led to success. I had the same experience when preparing for the Art of Dreaming: I would will that a certain thing happen before relaxing into the state, at which point I would become pure will and execute that for which I had prepared.
That's why I don't believe my "I" is an illusion - it is the essence of will.
Tyson: good reply re:dying
|
|
MH2
climber
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2014 - 09:40pm PT
|
Thank you, Mike. It is likely that I misunderstand. In my defense, I don't expect to get tested on the subject, and I feel that I am better off not trying to understand the inexplicable.
Wu-wei, though not understood, is no stranger to me or to other Westerners. In life one learns that some things come to you rather than you going to them. Keep the eyes open to opportunity.
[1642 G. Torriano Select Italian Proverbs]
I have got it at last, everything comes if a man will only wait.
"Science" is on that one, too:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/7589696/Good-things-do-come-to-those-who-wait-scientists-say.html
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2014 - 10:00pm PT
|
scientists-say
I am calling time. Clear the floor. Scientists don't say.
The data says.
There. OK. As you were.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2014 - 10:35pm PT
|
Per my Caltech friends - while AI is not my field of study....
Nor obviously any aspect of computer science. Again, you should really drop the whole programming / computer thing as it's working against you.
Per my Caltech friends...it it their field of study and the idea that the fundamentals would be lost on them is a bit of a howler.
Well, again, if you are accurate in describing their goal as "programming sentience" (which is a howler in its own right), then they are delusional - "fundamentals" don't even enter into it.
What they are saying, in short (I just talked to one of them) is that most of if not all the stuff written about creating a sentient or self-aware are connected or directly associated with the common errors we see presented and defended by people on this thread. One is thy myth presented by Healje, a very common one I am told, and that is that sentience is best understood - or perhaps can ONLY be understood in terms of tasking, in terms of DOING something.
Pretty good, except nowhere have I once presented sentience or self-awareness being "best understood in terms of tasking, in terms of DOING something", but rather I was simply pointing out that "no-tasking" is easy to reproduce in any computer. You on the other hand prattle on endlessly about 'no-tasking' and 'DOING nothing' as if it were the veritable grail of understanding sentience - i.e. you seem utterly obsessed with understanding sentience in terms of "tasking" and that the secret sauce is to be found in 'no-tasking'. Which is it? The Zen road to understanding sentience according to you is rooted in tasking and your efforts to control, suspend and "observe" it. Maybe it's just me, but you seem intent on having it both ways here; consider more conversations with your friends.
Not that the poor sap chides anything that does not directly conspire with doing, tasking, and what the computer will do with content. This is the stimulus response model I mentioned earlier and it pays no dividends per providing any kind of starting point for what is required to program self-awareness.
And yet again, if "programming self-awareness" is what your friends are about then they are delusional but possibly living high on the academic hog selling that line.
...but which I am told is not remotely backed up by any actual science.
Here again you display a peculiar 'have it both ways' when it comes to science not knowing something. You seem to think science not knowing something like how life began undercuts science as a whole (as if science not knowing something is some unusual state of science); next thing you know you're all about science not knowing something supports your argument. Again, which way is it? Hell, the claimed existence or 'indescribability' of qualia is not backed by any actual science either; BFD. So on that basis, I'm as equally supported saying both red and the experience of red can in fact emerge from biological systems as opposed to reifying them into the woo.
...hear the same old crapola about people pimping silly mysteries and ignorant distortions of simple terms like no-mind.
Well, "simple" is as simple does and so far you seem to be completely unable to state your proposition in "simple" terms which, from my perspective leaves you as the principal pimp of "silly mysteries" here.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
|
|
|
Jul 14, 2014 - 07:57am PT
|
Of course Tyson was replying on the fly to an unexpected question, but I believe the more enlightened answer would be to first have every usable organ donated to the benefit of living humans (corneas, kidneys etc) before the rest is buried for the benefit of insects, plants and bacteria.
As for will versus no mind, I will say again, that the purpose of achieving no-mind is not to lose the will but to change the will so that it works for the benefit of other beings and not just oneself.
Some people have called the unconscious our slave mind because it can be programmed so easily. We all have had the experience of saying to ourselves, "I must wake up at such and such a time and I hope I don't sleep through my alarm", and then waking up spontaneously a few seconds before the alarm goes off. Slave doesn't mean stupid.
The unskillful use of the conscious mind is to let it run around like a monkey and the unskillful use of the unconscious mind is to let it indulge in negative emotions. Both can be transformed into a happier, more functional mind through multiple means including meditation. Meditation in India is called the royal road because it is faster and more difficult than the other methods.
In the East one starts meditation with work on the unconscious as most people have so much negativity in there, they can't possibly think rationally let alone unselfishly with the will. In the West we have focussed on dealing with the will first and ignoring or repressing the unconscious until recently. I think the number of enlightened masters in the East compared to the West, demonstrates working on the unconscious first is more efficient.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Jul 14, 2014 - 10:28am PT
|
re: the mind of Neil deGrasse Tyson on tabletop physics (aka engineering physics) and Superconducting Super Collider (SSC)...
[Click to View YouTube Video]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MzObPO_YSg&feature=youtu.be
"the beginning of the end of America's leadership"
Where America drops the ball, other countries or consortiums will pick it up. There is the consolation. Onward Civilization!
.....
What (more) is mind?
Keeper of bronze-age superstitions (of one's ancestors) that corrupt a belief system and in turn lead to the kind of psychological/behavioral dyscrasia we're seeing in today's news out of the Middle East.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!