Moderation Questions
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic fa
It's clear that the confusion stems from a lack of understanding of obvious words when used by Craig.
He is asking you guys if the reality of lived experience can be as binary as the reality of the unregistered experience of an NPC, or not, and why, given more or less the same can be said for the true self and the soul, as detached from identity.
I am puzzled as to what is unclear
It's clear that the confusion stems from a lack of understanding of obvious words when used by Craig.He is asking you guys if the reality of lived experience can be as binary as the reality of the unregistered experience of an NPC, or not, and why, given more or less the same can be said for the true self and the soul, as detached from identity.I am puzzled as to what is unclea
Ah, well, he should have said!
Obviously, bliss comes only from inside ourselves and that it is most intense when we are free from thoughts and perceptions, which create the world and the body, that is, when we are in our pure being, while the egoic self is a ball of fear predicated on a belief that it is separate from the totality of consciousness.
Glad we cleared that up.
1. Define "reality check".
2. Define "real".
3. Define "disconnected from reality".
4. Do not use the words "real" and "reality" in the definitions.
Real - has an existence which you can experience
Are you asking me to define reality check because you are skeptical it has existence which can be experienced? You are skeptical that anyone has ever experienced a reality check?
Or are you just being contrarian as I suspect you are because you don’t like me very much?
Real - has an existence which you can experience
Are you asking me to define reality check because you are skeptical it has existence which can be experienced? You are skeptical that anyone has ever experienced a reality check?
Or are you just being contrarian as I suspect you are because you don’t like me very much?
I'm trying to impress upon you that nobody has any idea what you're talking about. It's quite clearly not just me as you can tell from other responses to you in this thread, and I suspect not only this thread.
Ok, I'm currently sitting in my living room, typing a response to you on my laptop. That is a "real" event that is currently occurring, per your definition. What is a "reality check" in this context? How would I know if and when I am experiencing one?
You talk purely in abstract terms. I am asking you to define those terms and give examples in a way that is understandable to someone unfamiliar with these abstractions. If you are not just spouting made up nonsense, you should have no problem whatsoever moving from the realm of the abstract to the realm of the concrete, from the general to the specific.
Moral truth - actions which bring you more in accordance with reality / the good.
The idea that murder is wrong is a moral truth. It’s not a historical fact.
At your lowest point in life, when you felt despair and disconnection - this is a reality check. It’s an unavoidable human experience.
It's clear that the confusion stems from a lack of understanding of obvious words when used by Craig.He is asking you guys if the reality of lived experience can be as binary as the reality of the unregistered experience of an NPC, or not, and why, given more or less the same can be said for the true self and the soul, as detached from identity.I am puzzled as to what is unclea
If this was posted by someone else I would assume it was a satirical post poking fun at craig's use of language because it does basically nothing to make anything clearer to anyone who didn't already understand the original phrasing.
I've always assumed that craig has a deep background in philosophy and it has become the lens through which he views, and therefore talks, about everything. That results in him using all sorts of terms that I assume have a well defined meaning in the fields he is taking them from but which often diverge quite considerably from standard parlance and make a lot of his posts indecipherable to anyone without the same deep background in philosophy. "Reality check" is a great example because it has a very common meaning that is almost entirely unrelated to the way craig is using it.
I would estimate that 80%+ of people on this forum can't do more than make educated guesses as his exact meaning in posts like his OP to the locked thread and that 99%+ of people in the general population would be in that same category.
And I’m trying to impress upon you guys that ignorance about basic moral truths like “reality check” is a serious problem. Assuming you are an adult.
This is a great post to work from, because it offers a very simple way to break down how your use of language can be confusing, if not outright incomprehensible.
How can a reality check be a moral truth? However you are defining "reality check", it is a name for some thing or action, and thus calling it a truth doesnt make a lot of sense. It seems to me that this is like saying a banana is a moral truth, or a long walk is a moral truth. Am I missing something?
If this was posted by someone else I would assume it was a satirical post poking fun at craig's use of language because it does basically nothing to make anything clearer to anyone who didn't already understand the original phrasing.I've always assumed that craig has a deep background in philosophy and it has become the lens through which he talks about everything. That results
I was giving Luciom the benefit of the doubt and assuming he was joking. If he was, it was pretty funny; if he wasn't, even funnier.
Again, this makes no sense to me. I can see someone calling an action moral/morally good, but not a moral truth. Whereas this...
...makes sense. An idea can be a truth, or falsehood.
Again, this makes no sense to me. I can see someone calling an action moral/morally good, but not a moral truth. Whereas this...
...makes sense. An idea can be a truth, or falsehood.
What makes the idea that murder is wrong true, if it’s not a historical fact? It’s because morally true and morally good are the same. In the same way, reality and the good are the same.
Have we reached the highest level of the good? If not, then we haven’t reached the highest level of reality.
Moral truth > historical truth
No. A thing or an action can not be a truth or falsehood, but an idea can.
I'm sure others might find holes in this, or find better ways to phrase it, but I'd suggest that if it can't be a sentence, it can't be a truth or falsehood.
Reality Check.
Banana.
Long walk.
Those aren't sentences, and they also can't be truths.
Murder is wrong.
That is a sentence, and can be a truth.
A reality check is like a banana in the tailpipe that makes you want to take a long walk off a short pier.
Am I doing it right?
A+
That's the problem with word salads - everything becomes covered with dressing and largely indistinguishable from everything else.
Just wait til you see his word smoothies.
And a music moral truth is?
I dunno man, I got that stuff I posted from Googling "spiritual nonsense generator". Reads uncannily like craig's posting, and I can assure you I don't have a deep (or any) background in philosophy.
I have read quite a bit of moral philosophy over the decades. The Platonic dialogues primarily concern moral philosophy. They are quite easy to follow, even if Plato's actual beliefs are sometimes difficult to pin down.
Abstraction, vagueness, and muddiness are not inherent to the field.
