tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post2501239571952122295..comments2024-03-27T11:16:36.951-07:00Comments on One Cʘsmos: The Eternal Drama of Cosmic Stupidity and the Cluelesside of ManGagdad Bobhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-13731390589443972432009-07-06T18:41:03.848-07:002009-07-06T18:41:03.848-07:00You know, I come here for the words, and not for t...You know, I come here for the words, and not for the symbols. <br /><br />But it occurred to me that if I ever needed to repeat these ideas, I would likely <i>not</i> remember the words you have written, but would recall the ideas <i>by way of</i> the symbols.<br /><br />Who knew?walthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01388218390016612051noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-32055554908656227572009-07-06T14:14:36.504-07:002009-07-06T14:14:36.504-07:00“Conversely, to be born again in spirit is (•)→(¶)...“Conversely, to be born again in spirit is (•)→(¶)”<br /><br />Or (z)→(¶)Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10589423819039764711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-18705538421353394462009-07-06T14:12:10.884-07:002009-07-06T14:12:10.884-07:00"Ultimately this is because (¶) is of the sam..."Ultimately this is because (¶) is of the same substance as O, and only like can know like."<br /><br />Reminds of Eckhart’s “ground”. "God’s ground is my ground..." ...or something like that.Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10589423819039764711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-90983238355209091402009-07-06T13:32:10.738-07:002009-07-06T13:32:10.738-07:00Dr. Sanity takes a sabbatical with an unknown end ...<a href="http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2009/07/magical-rose-gardens-vs-blooms-outside.html" rel="nofollow">Dr. Sanity takes a sabbatical with an unknown end date...</a>Alannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-27666569965970640112009-07-06T11:51:39.144-07:002009-07-06T11:51:39.144-07:00...<br /><br />Ahem.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-37473164170541708482009-07-06T11:46:20.638-07:002009-07-06T11:46:20.638-07:00"The reason for this is that true knowledge c..."The reason for this is that true knowledge can neither be obtained nor verified through (•)."<br /><br />Usually a big sticking point with people; it was a bit of a hurdle with myself as well; that instance, data, fact, are not knowledge, not yet having risen to that level ('course, as with below, not even that would be possible with out the full triune dance being in play, you'd remain at the not even dead level of a computer, but... )<br /><br />"This is the distinction between horizontal knowledge (k) and vertical wisdom (n), or true gnosis. Only the latter is unchanging. It is timeless. As such, it is not discovered in the same way we discover something unknown on the horizontal plane. Rather, it is already known to us, but must be recalled. Ultimately this is because (¶) is of the same substance as O, and only like can know like. (The fact that you already know it is why you understand me.)"<br /><br />'Recalled' has always been a bit of a loaded word for me... like Socrates with Meno's slave boy stepping him through geometry, but the boy didn't recall the geometric principles in the way we normally associate with recall, he discovered what was always there and available before, but were not noticed and explored.<br /><br />Perhaps 'Knowingly visitied for the first time, a scene passed by and through many times before, while unawares' ... but then you run into the brevity thing... Oh well.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.com