[David Maes]

I guess the alternative would be that I am not me.
But if this alternative would be true, we could never prove it to be true, because I could not be identified, could I?

I would say there are two possibilities:
- 1/ I am me, and nothing more.
- 2/ I am not me, but this can't be identified.

Am i right?

I guess the most simple truth would be I am me.
But I think we have to be careful, things aren't always what they seem, are they?

But in the end, I find it safer to go for number 1.

[Graybeard]

LOL .... I am tempted to ask ... if your not you, then who is, and who and where are you ? lol

But I understand what your proposing. Your right, all the evidence points to number 1. There is no evidence for number 2.

Why are you not totally happy with number 1 ? Why do you entertain the notion of number 2 ?

What things are not always what they seem ? I know of none.

cool bananas ... greg

[David Maes]

I'm not happy with 1. cause it means I'm finite.
I don't like to be absurd.

I like the idea that things aren't always what they seem, cause that gives me at least some hope, some 'light in the dark'.

[Graybeard]

Hmmmm ....... I wouldn't agree that to be finite is also to be absurd. Individual life entities may be finite, but collectively the wisdom and experience lives on ... possibly for an unforeseeable end time.

But we don't get a choice anyway. If wishes were fishes we'd all be casting nets.

cool bananas ... greg

[David Maes]

From a thinking of finiteness, the praises are sounded of the bungling, failing human, who never gives up, and who catches his or her own absurdity by perceiving the other as the one who gives meaning.

[Graybeard]

Originally Posted by David Maes I like the idea that things aren't always what they seem, cause that gives me at least some hope, some 'light in the dark'.

For me there is the known and the unknown. The unknown may be dark, but when its known it will be light. Because you can't know 'today' is no cause for 'at least some hope by imagining the other'. The laws of physics apply to the unknown as well, at least so far as that no cracks have appeared when applied to the 'known' ..... ergo: they will work on what is not yet known. Why propose new laws for the unknown, when the unknown has always proven to comply with the current laws once known.

Originally Posted by David Maes From a thinking of finiteness, the praises are sounded of the bungling, failing human, who never gives up, and who catches his or her own absurdity by perceiving the other as the one who gives meaning.

Bungling, at times maybe, failing, no, absurd, no. These epithets can only ever be applied by reviewing the path we have already come. They are historical. As we had no road map, no guidance, how could we know, we will do the same in the future ... unerringly. lol

Originally Posted by Robert Ardrey "We were born of risen apes, not fallen angels, and the apes were armed killers besides. And so what shall we wonder at? Our murders and massacres and missiles, and our irreconcilable regiments? Or our treaties whatever they may be worth; our sympathies however seldom they may be played; our peaceful acres, however frequently they may be converted to battlefields; our dreams however rarely they may be accomplished. The miracle of man is not how far he has sunk but how magnificently he has risen. We are known among the stars by our poems, not our corpses." Robert Ardrey (b. 1908-10-16)

cool bananas ... greg

[Mikal]

The human belief system is culturally and family derived as so too is the beginning sense of self or "I" identity and the building inner value system which supports our outer life. We stand in life in the shadow of being shamed to death to become what society sees as being culturally fit...thats the beginning of life experienced..the maturity of life is the task of undoing the culturally imported conditioning which is most times a hapless journey of finding and working through bruised and wounded inner principles and integrity. Thats when outer derived beliefs die and "knowing" is birthed...we can touch the mystery...it needs no proof such as science demands, it needs no defining existence to prove it...it just is..one knows that..
I am spiritual Dave...the rest of my family is religious...we go on in our lifetime patterns of love regardless that for some belief is outer and for me it is inner...I respect their belief needs and they respect mine...they do cohabitate together if you allow them...
I query why you question your existence...many a good man has went that way and strayed into the defining lines of insanity...is it not enough that you are without finding proof of why you are????
Questions are healthy but some questions are hidden at a depth that is never meant to reach...I think you should just be the best you that you came here to be...smiles

peace Mikal

[David Maes]

Originally Posted by Mikal I query why you question your existence...many a good man has went that way and strayed into the defining lines of insanity...is it not enough that you are without finding proof of why you are????

To most people, giving meaning means, that you must be able to hang up what's human to a sort of higher 'peg', so that it has something 'eternal', something 'permanent', some objective value. That need of that what's objectivily significant is collective insanity.

[Mikal]

Dave....I have hung myself on an even higher "peg" of awareness and realization..From its perch I see and understand "collective insanity" as you call it...I long ago began the journey to consciously stand outside the fringe of this collective group insanity...insanity by the way means..."in the state of collective unknowing"...

Peace Mikal

[David Maes]

Representatives of religions don't have empty hands to lift people over their difficulties of life. They offer them a 'package of insanity'.