Page 1 of 1 [ 16 posts ] 

Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 81
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

11 Aug 2011, 9:43 pm

The Imitation is full of great stuff. This seems apropos:

HAPPY is he to whom truth manifests itself, not in signs and words that fade, but as it actually is. Our opinions, our senses often deceive us and we discern very little.

What good is much discussion of involved and obscure matters when our ignorance of them will not be held against us on Judgment Day? Neglect of things which are profitable and necessary and undue concern with those which are irrelevant and harmful, are great folly.

We have eyes and do not see.

What, therefore, have we to do with questions of philosophy? He to whom the Eternal Word speaks is free from theorizing. For from this Word are all things and of Him all things speak -- the Beginning Who also speaks to us. Without this Word no man understands or judges aright. He to whom it becomes everything, who traces all things to it and who sees all things in it, may ease his heart and remain at peace with God.

O God, You Who are the truth, make me one with You in love everlasting. I am often wearied by the many things I hear and read, but in You is all that I long for. Let the learned be still, let all creatures be silent before You; You alone speak to me.

The more recollected a man is, and the more simple of heart he becomes, the easier he understands sublime things, for he receives the light of knowledge from above. The pure, simple, and steadfast spirit is not distracted by many labors, for he does them all for the honor of God. And since he enjoys interior peace he seeks no selfish end in anything. What, indeed, gives more trouble and affliction than uncontrolled desires of the heart?

A good and devout man arranges in his mind the things he has to do, not according to the whims of evil inclination but according to the dictates of right reason. Who is forced to struggle more than he who tries to master himself? This ought to be our purpose, then: to conquer self, to become stronger each day, to advance in virtue.

Every perfection in this life has some imperfection mixed with it and no learning of ours is without some darkness. Humble knowledge of self is a surer path to God than the ardent pursuit of learning. Not that learning is to be considered evil, or knowledge, which is good in itself and so ordained by God; but a clean conscience and virtuous life ought always to be preferred. Many often err and accomplish little or nothing because they try to become learned rather than to live well.

If men used as much care in uprooting vices and implanting virtues as they do in discussing problems, there would not be so much evil and scandal in the world, or such laxity in religious organizations. On the day of judgment, surely, we shall not be asked what we have read but what we have done; not how well we have spoken but how well we have lived.

Tell me, where now are all the masters and teachers whom you knew so well in life and who were famous for their learning? Others have already taken their places and I know not whether they ever think of their predecessors. During life they seemed to be something; now they are seldom remembered. How quickly the glory of the world passes away! If only their lives had kept pace with their learning, then their study and reading would have been worth while.

How many there are who perish because of vain worldly knowledge and too little care for serving God. They became vain in their own conceits because they chose to be great rather than humble.

He is truly great who has great charity. He is truly great who is little in his own eyes and makes nothing of the highest honor. He is truly wise who looks upon all earthly things as folly that he may gain Christ. He who does God's will and renounces his own is truly very learned.



simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

11 Aug 2011, 9:46 pm

Or not.



11 Aug 2011, 11:11 pm

Philologos wrote:
HAPPY is he to whom truth manifests itself, not in signs and words that fade, but as it actually is. Our opinions, our senses often deceive us and we discern very little.

What good is much discussion of involved and obscure matters when our ignorance of them will not be held against us on Judgment Day? Neglect of things which are profitable and necessary and undue concern with those which are irrelevant and harmful, are great folly.

We have eyes and do not see.

What, therefore, have we to do with questions of philosophy? He to whom the Eternal Word speaks is free from theorizing. For from this Word are all things and of Him all things speak -- the Beginning Who also speaks to us. Without this Word no man understands or judges aright. He to whom it becomes everything, who traces all things to it and who sees all things in it, may ease his heart and remain at peace with God.

O God, You Who are the truth, make me one with You in love everlasting. I am often wearied by the many things I hear and read, but in You is all that I long for. Let the learned be still, let all creatures be silent before You; You alone speak to me.

The more recollected a man is, and the more simple of heart he becomes, the easier he understands sublime things, for he receives the light of knowledge from above. The pure, simple, and steadfast spirit is not distracted by many labors, for he does them all for the honor of God. And since he enjoys interior peace he seeks no selfish end in anything. What, indeed, gives more trouble and affliction than uncontrolled desires of the heart?

A good and devout man arranges in his mind the things he has to do, not according to the whims of evil inclination but according to the dictates of right reason. Who is forced to struggle more than he who tries to master himself? This ought to be our purpose, then: to conquer self, to become stronger each day, to advance in virtue.

Every perfection in this life has some imperfection mixed with it and no learning of ours is without some darkness. Humble knowledge of self is a surer path to God than the ardent pursuit of learning. Not that learning is to be considered evil, or knowledge, which is good in itself and so ordained by God; but a clean conscience and virtuous life ought always to be preferred. Many often err and accomplish little or nothing because they try to become learned rather than to live well.

If men used as much care in uprooting vices and implanting virtues as they do in discussing problems, there would not be so much evil and scandal in the world, or such laxity in religious organizations. On the day of judgment, surely, we shall not be asked what we have read but what we have done; not how well we have spoken but how well we have lived.

Tell me, where now are all the masters and teachers whom you knew so well in life and who were famous for their learning? Others have already taken their places and I know not whether they ever think of their predecessors. During life they seemed to be something; now they are seldom remembered. How quickly the glory of the world passes away! If only their lives had kept pace with their learning, then their study and reading would have been worth while.

How many there are who perish because of vain worldly knowledge and too little care for serving God. They became vain in their own conceits because they chose to be great rather than humble.

He is truly great who has great charity. He is truly great who is little in his own eyes and makes nothing of the highest honor. He is truly wise who looks upon all earthly things as folly that he may gain Christ. He who does God's will and renounces his own is truly very learned.




COOL STORY, BRO!



Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 81
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

11 Aug 2011, 11:44 pm

simon_says wrote:
Or not.


You pays your money and you takes your choice - or in Spanish 'tother way round. Pascal was less pithy.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

12 Aug 2011, 12:51 pm

Philologos wrote:
The Imitation is full of great stuff. This seems apropos:

HAPPY is he to whom truth manifests itself, not in signs and words that fade, but as it actually is. Our opinions, our senses often deceive us and we discern very little.

What good is much discussion of involved and obscure matters when our ignorance of them will not be held against us on Judgment Day? Neglect of things which are profitable and necessary and undue concern with those which are irrelevant and harmful, are great folly.

We have eyes and do not see.

What, therefore, have we to do with questions of philosophy? He to whom the Eternal Word speaks is free from theorizing. For from this Word are all things and of Him all things speak -- the Beginning Who also speaks to us. Without this Word no man understands or judges aright. He to whom it becomes everything, who traces all things to it and who sees all things in it, may ease his heart and remain at peace with God.

O God, You Who are the truth, make me one with You in love everlasting. I am often wearied by the many things I hear and read, but in You is all that I long for. Let the learned be still, let all creatures be silent before You; You alone speak to me.

The more recollected a man is, and the more simple of heart he becomes, the easier he understands sublime things, for he receives the light of knowledge from above. The pure, simple, and steadfast spirit is not distracted by many labors, for he does them all for the honor of God. And since he enjoys interior peace he seeks no selfish end in anything. What, indeed, gives more trouble and affliction than uncontrolled desires of the heart?

A good and devout man arranges in his mind the things he has to do, not according to the whims of evil inclination but according to the dictates of right reason. Who is forced to struggle more than he who tries to master himself? This ought to be our purpose, then: to conquer self, to become stronger each day, to advance in virtue.

Every perfection in this life has some imperfection mixed with it and no learning of ours is without some darkness. Humble knowledge of self is a surer path to God than the ardent pursuit of learning. Not that learning is to be considered evil, or knowledge, which is good in itself and so ordained by God; but a clean conscience and virtuous life ought always to be preferred. Many often err and accomplish little or nothing because they try to become learned rather than to live well.

If men used as much care in uprooting vices and implanting virtues as they do in discussing problems, there would not be so much evil and scandal in the world, or such laxity in religious organizations. On the day of judgment, surely, we shall not be asked what we have read but what we have done; not how well we have spoken but how well we have lived.

Tell me, where now are all the masters and teachers whom you knew so well in life and who were famous for their learning? Others have already taken their places and I know not whether they ever think of their predecessors. During life they seemed to be something; now they are seldom remembered. How quickly the glory of the world passes away! If only their lives had kept pace with their learning, then their study and reading would have been worth while.

How many there are who perish because of vain worldly knowledge and too little care for serving God. They became vain in their own conceits because they chose to be great rather than humble.

He is truly great who has great charity. He is truly great who is little in his own eyes and makes nothing of the highest honor. He is truly wise who looks upon all earthly things as folly that he may gain Christ. He who does God's will and renounces his own is truly very learned.


I hope you realize that this is all bunk.

ruveyn



Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 81
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

12 Aug 2011, 6:03 pm

ruveyn wrote:
nd renounces his own is truly very learned.


I hope you realize that this is all bunk.

ruveyn[/quote]

A. Please indicate how "bunk" and "claptrap" relate in your schema.

B. How exactly does a mindless brain hope?

C. I am not in the habit of posting bosh, drivel, claptrap, bunk, nonsense, idiocy, or inanity without appropriate indications. I do, howver, provide heresy and gobbledegook - but then it is not quoted but mine own.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

12 Aug 2011, 9:13 pm

Philologos wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
nd renounces his own is truly very learned.


I hope you realize that this is all bunk.

ruveyn


A. Please indicate how "bunk" and "claptrap" relate in your schema.

B. How exactly does a mindless brain hope?

.[/quote]

Intelligently. My mindless brain works better than your brainless mind.

ruveyn



Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 81
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

12 Aug 2011, 11:40 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Philologos wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
nd renounces his own is truly very learned.


I hope you realize that this is all bunk.

ruveyn


A. Please indicate how "bunk" and "claptrap" relate in your schema.

B. How exactly does a mindless brain hope?

.


Intelligently. My mindless brain works better than your brainless mind.

ruveyn[/quote]

I forgot to mention hogwash. A brainglitch - my mind was elsewhere.

Apart from the fact that you have - by your own admission - no access to how my mind operates, you seem to have missed my interrogative as to the difference between bink and claptrap. Claptrap is not one I actively use; it seems it must be one of these things somebody on the web has popularized, since I just spotted another - of very much the ewrong background - using it. You may of course come by it honestly. I tend to put it in the same category as hogwash. Bunk, on the other hand, involves an extra feature or two which puts it not quite in the ballyhoo bailiwick, but very near what I would had I been differently brought up assign to the category euphemistically initial slanged to BS.

But you may have a different breakdown.

Anyway, quite seriously, I have to see hope as a mind function, and therefore out of your range.

But to be fair, I rather doubt you were using the verb literally - it is hard to see that you could have any legitimate expectation [a brain function] that I do not take Thomas seriously.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

13 Aug 2011, 7:25 am

Philologos wrote:

Apart from the fact that you have - by your own admission - no access to how my mind operates, you seem to have missed my interrogative as to the difference between bink and claptrap.


There is no mind. There never was a mind. There are only physical organs at work in our body producing consciousness for a limited period. All the MRIs PET scans, EEGs and chemical analysis have never found a mind. It is a bogus concept, right up there with Spirit and Soul.

Produce one ounce of reproducible objective empirical evidence for the existence of a mind.

And I can see your brains just as you can see mine with the right scanning and viewing tools.

ruveyn



Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 81
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

13 Aug 2011, 10:43 am

ruveyn wrote:
Philologos wrote:

Apart from the fact that you have - by your own admission - no access to how my mind operates, you seem to have missed my interrogative as to the difference between bink and claptrap.


There is no mind. There never was a mind. There are only physical organs at work in our body producing consciousness for a limited period. All the MRIs PET scans, EEGs and chemical analysis have never found a mind. It is a bogus concept, right up there with Spirit and Soul.

Produce one ounce of reproducible objective empirical evidence for the existence of a mind.

And I can see your brains just as you can see mine with the right scanning and viewing tools.

ruveyn


And still you ignore the question.

Did you ever see electricity?

I can see a battery. I can see a dynamo. I can see a lightbulb, a computer, the fan that is today a godsend.

But you are not goinf to see electricity. Just its effects.

Of course it was said better about 20 centuries back.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

13 Aug 2011, 10:54 am

Philologos wrote:

And still you ignore the question.

Did you ever see electricity?

I.


I have perceived it through my skin. I have receive electric shocks (mostly by accident). Also I see sparks jumping the gap. The is air heated glowing hot by electric current. Electricity is as real as rain and can be observed with the appropriate instruments. Minds cannot. Which is a pretty strong indication that minds are not real. But electricity is. In fact magnetism is the relativistic manifestation of electric currents. See works by Purcell on this matter. Do you see magnets sticking to your refrigerator door? If you do, you are seeing electricity in action.

ruveyn



Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 81
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

13 Aug 2011, 11:58 am

ruveyn wrote:

I have perceived it through my skin. I have receive electric shocks (mostly by accident). Also I see sparks jumping the gap. The is air heated glowing hot by electric current. Electricity is as real as rain and can be observed with the appropriate instruments. Minds cannot. Which is a pretty strong indication that minds are not real. But electricity is. In fact magnetism is the relativistic manifestation of electric currents. See works by Purcell on this matter. Do you see magnets sticking to your refrigerator door? If you do, you are seeing electricity in action.

ruveyn


AND you continue thus impertinently to ignore my legitimate and discipline appropriate question.

AND you knewjerk, so I will broken record back at you:

You are not going to see electricity. Just its effects.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

13 Aug 2011, 1:15 pm

Philologos wrote:

You are not going to see electricity. Just its effects.


All that anyone perceives is effects. The effects are real, so must be, the causes.

At the risk of sounding Kantian, all we have are the phenomena.

ruveyn



Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 81
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

13 Aug 2011, 1:34 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Philologos wrote:

You are not going to see electricity. Just its effects.


All that anyone perceives is effects. The effects are real, so must be, the causes.

ruveyn


You obstinately refuse to answer. What would it take that brain to pop me up a definition. It is not like there is anything rude about a simple question.

I am going to let your brain ponder that statement of yours:

"All that anyone perceives is effects. The effects are real, so must be, the causes."

Descartes.

Plus quis custodiet.

Plus the stay at home whose mother is a gourmet cook.

Plus parallax.

Another question [why do I bother asking, having no idea what is in your programming?]:

Do you know of anything Judaic relating to "The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light."? The contrast with poneros is strange.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

13 Aug 2011, 1:36 pm

Philologos wrote:

Do you know of anything Judaic relating to "The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light."? The contrast with poneros is strange.


Aristotle said pretty much the same thing. Which ignores the fact we have at least four other senses besides vision.

ruveyn



Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 81
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

13 Aug 2011, 2:32 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Philologos wrote:

Do you know of anything Judaic relating to "The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light."? The contrast with poneros is strange.


Aristotle said pretty much the same thing. Which ignores the fact we have at least four other senses besides vision.

ruveyn


AND still you refuse a simple request. May it ease your prickled mind - but still I ask.

Best I can find in a short for Aristotle is "the eye of the soul that sees what is beautiful as the end or highest good of action gains its active state only with moral virtue". Seems a strange thing for you to quote.

But while we can probably pass over the gap between "light of the body" and "eye of the soul", it is NOT clear that Jesus' "simplicity" can be equated to Aristotle's "moral virtue". One does wonder what was intended. It remains as obscure as my father's "shgut your ears" once was.