inexpressible.com

| Competition 1 | Comp 1 Entries: 552- | Competition 2 | Competition 3 | US Pres. Deter. Process | MessageBoard |
| Search inexpressible | Books | Contact Us | Home |

Challenge the Philosophy - Entries 494-

Challenge the Philosophy Competition 1 - Entries 494-

In concise words, tell us how the idea that we cannot [more reasonably] truly know who we are, in part or in whole, and be who we are at the same time can be overcome.

Definitions of the principal terms used in the competition:

"We cannot [more reasonably] truly know": our inability to more soundly and consistently show how we can know something in entirety. For further explanation, and explanation of "know", see "cannot truly know".
"Who we are": the entire make-up of ourselves as human beings. For further explanation see who we are.
"Be": the state of living or existing.
"Existence": things and life-forms occupying space.
"We": all Homo sapiens who are existing, regardless of level of functionality.
"At the same time": the simultaneous occurrence of true knowledge of who we are, in part or in whole, and being who we are.
"Overcome": more reasonable refutation of the proposition, "we cannot truly know who we are, in part or in whole, and be who we are at the same time". "More reasonable refutation" entails using reason in the most objective manner possible, and includes the arguments stated in the entries and disputes submitted to this "Challenge the Philosophy" competition, and the arguments stated in the responses to them. Also, one idea or position is deemed more reasonable than another idea or position if it is more sound and consistent. (Overcoming the proposition can entail more reasonably refuting its terms and the concepts behind them.)


494. Entry:

Reply to the response to Entry 491

“I never implied that childhood state is real and adult state of mind is unreal, as you put it. I can summarize what I have said so far as follows: - MIND is NEITHER real NOR unreal. It is a phantom notion which springs up from nowhere. (Hence those who swear that mind has to be only real have created everything out of nothing!) In our childhood state devoid of notions or with minimum notions, the layer between real and unreal is thin and the range of such movement is small. Thus being close to the middle point (where mind=0, neither + or - or real or unreal, i.e., no attributes) innocent children are quite spontaneous, loveable, fearless, creative as can be seen all around us (or even felt by ourselves once upon a time, in our own lost childhood) On the other hand, the adult mind full of notions is never near the middle point as they are always immersed in some activity or the other owing to the mind. Such activities or awareness is NOT always in the real as you claim; for, when the adults sleep mind is oblivious or in dream state it is unreal. Hence, your comparative approach is only for a group of few adults only, that, too, only during one third of 24hrs by our reckoning of time. If that is so, how can it be truly judged to be MORE reasonable? Is 8 hrs reckoning by a few seriously -minded persons out of 24hrs as lived by all adults and children, amount to being the majority or more reasonable? This is what I am pointing out. When we get out of slumber awareness move from the domain of unreal to real, as per our reckoning. Consequently, logically speaking it must pass through the center point whether one is able to register it or not. This is equivalent to a fleeting samadhi, perhaps or moments of rapture when tranquility prevails as in our childhood. But we miss it entirely due lack of our serious attention or familiarity as what it is like. A few who manage to grasp this truth of the midpoint (between real and unreal) being the only reality, are in a constant state of blissful rapture and at the same time they being able to shift the awareness encased in body-mind apparatus from the unlimited to a limited , with infinite possibilities therein.”

R. Rangan June 29 2004

Response:

From our comparative perspective in which no endpoint is completely attainable, how does the MIND more reasonably “spring up from nowhere”? Surely, there are causes like sensory interaction for the thoughts which comprise the MIND.

Moreover, your claim that the MIND is “phantom” (or illusory) self-defeats your position because it stems from your phantom MIND, and therefore your position is phantom or illusory as well.

Further, according to your position, the midpoint between the Real and Unreal is Reality, which means that the Real is not Reality or real. So we are left with the Real and Unreal as unreal, and therefore, there is no separation or midpoint between the two points because they are the same point. (Hence, according to your position we end up with Reality (or real) and Unreal, which is in contradiction with the more reasonable possibility of all human thought (or graduated reality of human thought with no fixed endpoint).


Entries 489-493


| Competition 1 | Comp 1 Entries: 552- | Competition 2 | Competition 3 | US Pres. Deter. Process | MessageBoard |
| Search inexpressible | Books | Contact Us | Home |
LID 214