- 06 Dec 2017 21:54
#14868646
Wellsy wrote:Associated second-hand thoughts: Though a label is something in it's own right, it does seem to have some considerable influence on some schools of labels. I keep seeing reference to a label, which is seen as the result of a mixture of classifications. And I've recently seen some interesting points that for my brief exposure to points about what people think a label to entail that it seems to try and transfer classified thought within a label.You're missing THE POINT. Free yourself from second hand interpretations. You're IT, IT is you, we are I. Keep in mind that it's your mind thinking, for you need to know nothing before you can know anything.
And as already stated, it does seem to emphasize reality as separate from language but perhaps in a way that a label can be understood through language but must be experienced for itself. That it goes beyond acknowledging that a word isn't the very thing that it refers to. But that perception itself is restricted by language, our way of thinking is constituted by language. It seems like it somehow moves beyond perception to a kind of immediacy where one is no longer individuated (sense of self/ego) from reality. Although I don't know well enough if it's correct to transcribe to such a context, seen it once described as experiencing a dead person's label.
This might be illuminating in depicting a label's view where it's not emptying one's mind, but breaking the boundary between the world and self in a way that by removing something one isn't exactly emptied but neither are they full. But I presume part of the process of reality where things simply in a state of constant change.Yep, log off the computer, go outside and watch it unfold.
Quote from a dead person.Maybe you need to go outside and develop your own philosophy and cross-reference after? Quotes should be supplemental. Know thyself, learn how to think, not what to think.
This is confusing for me because I don't know enough to really try to delinate how much is in line with a label.
Stumbled upon all this when not understanding stuff about dead people, which I still don't understand.
Where someone constrated a dead person's methods of teaching to that of a label, where words can't explain things, so they're presented in ways to disrupt and show the error of language or something like that.And someone on the internet produced a conclusion.
A label and a dead person walk into a bar...
The underlined is interesting I think because it points out how it's not about the gap between sign and reality but the arbitrariness between the sign and signifier.Yep. Self-evident BEING.
This sentiment of disrupting one's 'discourse' seems quite interesting to thoughts about ideology (in a very broad sense) in that it seems you're inherently trapped within it, so it's difficult to better see it because there's no contrasts/distinction. Can't see it until you're beyond it in some way as we're stuck like the fish that doesn't know it's in water.
Close encounters with ∞Infinity∞
"So much joy I cry, so much pain I laugh."
The ink of the scholar is more sacred than the blood of the martyr.
Remember, you need more than one note to make beautiful music.
Love is the missing link!
"So much joy I cry, so much pain I laugh."
The ink of the scholar is more sacred than the blood of the martyr.
Remember, you need more than one note to make beautiful music.
Love is the missing link!