Forums > Social Discussion > The paradox of our age
Login/Join to Participategeek, level 1
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
Posted:
We have bigger houses but smaller families;
more conveniences, but less time.
We have more degrees, but less sense;
more knowledge, but less judgement;
more medicines but less healthiness.
We've been all the way to the moon and back,
but we have trouble crossing the street to meet the new neighbours.
We have built more computers to hold more information,
to produce more copies than ever,
but we have less communication.
We have become long on quantity,
but short on quality.
These are times of fast foods but slow digestion.
Tall man but short character;
steep profits but shallow relationships.
It is a time when there is much in the window,
but nothing in the room.
the Dalai Lama
We have bigger houses but smaller families;
more conveniences, but less time.
We have more degrees, but less sense;
more knowledge, but less judgement;
more medicines but less healthiness.
We've been all the way to the moon and back,
but we have trouble crossing the street to meet the new neighbours.
We have built more computers to hold more information,
to produce more copies than ever,
but we have less communication.
We have become long on quantity,
but short on quality.
These are times of fast foods but slow digestion.
Tall man but short character;
steep profits but shallow relationships.
It is a time when there is much in the window,
but nothing in the room.
the Dalai Lama
Holistic Spinner (I hope)
Dreamer
4,308 posts
Location: York, England
4,308 posts
Location: York, England
Posted:
Off topic:
Can anyone tell me where Britsih "ta" comes from or what it means? I realize I'm been translating it in a singuarly uruguayan context for awhile... and so now i'm feeling confused
/off topic
Another thought, on the first point, would be considering moving back to smaller houses. There's definetly a movement towards that for some people here in america, to get more personalized houses designed more efficiently for the people living in them. A large house can feel small, or a small one large, if you build it right. I'm not going to go into all the details here, but basically making smaller cosier spaces tends to make us happier and there's architectiural tricks to make spaces feel bigger when they arn't.
For anyone lucky enough to be building or remodelling a house, there's plenty of good books on this and most architects should be able to help you. For the rest of us, we have to live with what we get! (Altho I propose the next place I live I should be able to raise my hands above my head without banging them into the ceiling!)
Off topic:
Can anyone tell me where Britsih "ta" comes from or what it means? I realize I'm been translating it in a singuarly uruguayan context for awhile... and so now i'm feeling confused
/off topic
Another thought, on the first point, would be considering moving back to smaller houses. There's definetly a movement towards that for some people here in america, to get more personalized houses designed more efficiently for the people living in them. A large house can feel small, or a small one large, if you build it right. I'm not going to go into all the details here, but basically making smaller cosier spaces tends to make us happier and there's architectiural tricks to make spaces feel bigger when they arn't.
For anyone lucky enough to be building or remodelling a house, there's plenty of good books on this and most architects should be able to help you. For the rest of us, we have to live with what we get! (Altho I propose the next place I live I should be able to raise my hands above my head without banging them into the ceiling!)
Keep your dream alive
Dreamin is still how the strong survive
Shalom VeAhavah
New Hampshire has a point....
geek, level 1
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
Posted:
it means 'thank you'. i've no idea where it comes from.
and neither does the good lord wiki.
[/offtopic]
it means 'thank you'. i've no idea where it comes from.
and neither does the good lord wiki.
[/offtopic]
Holistic Spinner (I hope)
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
Why would it be titled "the paradox of our age" if it's not about ages?
Written by: bluecat
to differing societies perhaps?
Why would it be titled "the paradox of our age" if it's not about ages?
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
Posted:
I live in a tiny band-A cottage when I'm back home. I'm not sure if that makes me a better person or what but it is certainly very stressful when I want some space to myself.
I live in a tiny band-A cottage when I'm back home. I'm not sure if that makes me a better person or what but it is certainly very stressful when I want some space to myself.
According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...
geek, level 1
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
Posted:
can you really not see that it might be about things within that specified age?
Written by: NYCWritten by: bluecat
to differing societies perhaps?
Why would it be titled "the paradox of our age" if it's not about ages?
can you really not see that it might be about things within that specified age?
Holistic Spinner (I hope)
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
Oooh, 23 posts since the last time I came on this morning!
FNF and Co.:
Right, we can see the world. We see it with TV, the Internet, Telephones etc etc.
For us to have access to these things, it appears to have been necessary to screw up the planet.
See? We wouldn't have these problems if globalisation hadn't happened. Given a choice between knowing about Global Warming and it not happening then I know which I prefer.
Same goes for Humanitarian concerns. It is MNCs (Multi-National Corporations) that provide us with TV and other communications. It is MNCs who are mostly responsible for people being kept in poverty, and not letting 3rd World countries develop their own economies. Most MNCs are also completely opposed to any kind of research into renewable energy sources, because that will cut into their profit margins while everyone switches over.
In the Top 100 economies in the world, just under half of them are private MNCs. They make more than most countries.
Oooh, 23 posts since the last time I came on this morning!
FNF and Co.:
Right, we can see the world. We see it with TV, the Internet, Telephones etc etc.
For us to have access to these things, it appears to have been necessary to screw up the planet.
See? We wouldn't have these problems if globalisation hadn't happened. Given a choice between knowing about Global Warming and it not happening then I know which I prefer.
Same goes for Humanitarian concerns. It is MNCs (Multi-National Corporations) that provide us with TV and other communications. It is MNCs who are mostly responsible for people being kept in poverty, and not letting 3rd World countries develop their own economies. Most MNCs are also completely opposed to any kind of research into renewable energy sources, because that will cut into their profit margins while everyone switches over.
In the Top 100 economies in the world, just under half of them are private MNCs. They make more than most countries.
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Pooh-Bah
1,662 posts
Location: Bristol
1,662 posts
Location: Bristol
Posted:
i see what you're saying about multinationals & stuff, but there was still crippling mass poverty before tv was invented.
Written by: Sethis
For us to have access to these things, it appears to have been necessary to screw up the planet.
See? We wouldn't have these problems if globalisation hadn't happened. Given a choice between knowing about Global Warming and it not happening then I know which I prefer.
i see what you're saying about multinationals & stuff, but there was still crippling mass poverty before tv was invented.
I had a dream that my friend had a
strong-bad pop up book,
it was the book of my dreams.
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
Are we playing the question game?
Did you not see that it says "It is a time when there is much in the window, but nothing in the room."?
And do you not know that it is impossible to argue against BOLD?
Written by: bluecatWritten by: NYCWritten by: bluecat
to differing societies perhaps?
Why would it be titled "the paradox of our age" if it's not about ages?
can you really not see that it might be about things within that specified age?
Are we playing the question game?
Did you not see that it says "It is a time when there is much in the window, but nothing in the room."?
And do you not know that it is impossible to argue against BOLD?
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
geek, level 1
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
Posted:
just because something ios said about the time it is in does not automatically mean it is being compared to another time.
you americans and your competitive streak
just because something ios said about the time it is in does not automatically mean it is being compared to another time.
you americans and your competitive streak
Holistic Spinner (I hope)
geek, level 1
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
Posted:
oh. i'm sorry. i didn't see the bold.
*bows submissively to imperialist formatting*
oh. i'm sorry. i didn't see the bold.
*bows submissively to imperialist formatting*
Holistic Spinner (I hope)
geek, level 1
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
Posted:
anyway. you started it, so neeeeeeeee!
(the question game)
anyway. you started it, so neeeeeeeee!
(the question game)
Holistic Spinner (I hope)
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
I'm not actually conviced of that.
Isn't stating a time inherently comparing it with another time?
Convince me.
If I say "I was born in the morning" isn't that contrasting the other portions of the day that I don't wasn't born?
If I say "This is an age when everyone is stupid" aren't I suggesting that there are other ages when that might or might not be true?
"My plane left at 4:33" implies not at 5:00. Doesn't it?
Written by: bluecat
just because something is said about the time it is in does not automatically mean it is being compared to another time.
I'm not actually conviced of that.
Isn't stating a time inherently comparing it with another time?
Convince me.
If I say "I was born in the morning" isn't that contrasting the other portions of the day that I don't wasn't born?
If I say "This is an age when everyone is stupid" aren't I suggesting that there are other ages when that might or might not be true?
"My plane left at 4:33" implies not at 5:00. Doesn't it?
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
Dreamer
4,308 posts
Location: York, England
4,308 posts
Location: York, England
Posted:
But you admit, then, that you don't have to know? Perhaps its just "it is this way in this age and we don't know about the others" full stop
Written by: NYC
If I say "This is an age when everyone is stupid" aren't I suggesting that there are other ages when that might or might not be true?
But you admit, then, that you don't have to know? Perhaps its just "it is this way in this age and we don't know about the others" full stop
Keep your dream alive
Dreamin is still how the strong survive
Shalom VeAhavah
New Hampshire has a point....
geek, level 1
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
5,300 posts
Location: everywhere
Posted:
obviously it is for you.
it is not so for me.
problem solved
(or at least avoided constructively)
i honestly don't read that quote(or not, as the case may be) as being a comparison to other times, but as a comparison to other ways of life.
obviously it is for you.
it is not so for me.
problem solved
(or at least avoided constructively)
i honestly don't read that quote(or not, as the case may be) as being a comparison to other times, but as a comparison to other ways of life.
Holistic Spinner (I hope)
SILVER Member
Star Trekker
1,733 posts
Location: Cheshire, United Kingdom
Star Trekker
1,733 posts
Location: Cheshire, United Kingdom
Posted:
Lots of good points made but i understand the paradox the DL is on about and it's more on a micro level than macro - life WAS tougher before, we DO have longer life expectancy, we CAN communicate in ways previously undreamt of.
Having said that, our easier lives have given us more time for navel-gazing and so many people find an emptiness in their lives; mass communication has shown everyone the inequality of the world and rather than change it, they want what others have and feel cheated if they can't get it; and for me the worst thing is not what you and I have now compared to our parents and grandparents, but what legacy we collectively are going to leave for our children.
Whilst most HoPpers I imagine will bring their children up on healthy (ish) diets, educate them well and broadly, striving to encourage well-balanced adults, that is most definitely NOT the norm and so many children have SHORTER life-expectancy than we do, don't have the social, educational or emotional skills to cope with adulthood. All the things the DL mentions contribute to this ticking time-bomb and I think that is his true message.
In our attempts to improve our lives we've kinda thrown the baby out with the bath water a bit so we need to claw back some of the good things that we've lost so we can make better use of the progress we've made.
Sorry if that was a bit wordy
Lots of good points made but i understand the paradox the DL is on about and it's more on a micro level than macro - life WAS tougher before, we DO have longer life expectancy, we CAN communicate in ways previously undreamt of.
Having said that, our easier lives have given us more time for navel-gazing and so many people find an emptiness in their lives; mass communication has shown everyone the inequality of the world and rather than change it, they want what others have and feel cheated if they can't get it; and for me the worst thing is not what you and I have now compared to our parents and grandparents, but what legacy we collectively are going to leave for our children.
Whilst most HoPpers I imagine will bring their children up on healthy (ish) diets, educate them well and broadly, striving to encourage well-balanced adults, that is most definitely NOT the norm and so many children have SHORTER life-expectancy than we do, don't have the social, educational or emotional skills to cope with adulthood. All the things the DL mentions contribute to this ticking time-bomb and I think that is his true message.
In our attempts to improve our lives we've kinda thrown the baby out with the bath water a bit so we need to claw back some of the good things that we've lost so we can make better use of the progress we've made.
Sorry if that was a bit wordy
'The last rays of crimson on the spindle tree as the cerise fruit splits and reveals its orange seeds in a gloriously clashing colour scheme no-one would ever dare to wear'
Euonymous Europeus
small member
116 posts
Location: Hastings
116 posts
Location: Hastings
Posted:
I can interpret it like this:
We have bigger houses but smaller families;
more conveniences, but less time.
Um, I don't. Unless he means conveniences like trains. which are always late which leaves you with less time to get to work.
We have more degrees, but less sense;
more knowledge, but less judgement;
We are full of s**t
more medicines but less healthiness.
We are enjoying life a little too much.
We've been all the way to the moon and back,
but we have trouble crossing the street to meet the new neighbours.
We are just lazy. (And see below)
We have built more computers to hold more information,
to produce more copies than ever,
but we have less communication.
We realised most people aren't worth talking/listening too.
(See above, full of s**t)
We have become long on quantity,
but short on quality.
This I agree with, sorta.
These are times of fast foods but slow digestion.
I think he is having a dig at fat people.
Tall man but short character;
I think he is having a dig at tall people. And calling them uniteresting or bland(or trying to be sly and saying they have small willys, comeing from a guy who doen't even use his
). Not very buddha like.
steep profits but shallow relationships.
Never mix buisness and pleasure. Or is that mixing buisness and pleasure. Like hookers.
It is a time when there is much in the window,
but nothing in the room.
He is admitting to being a peeping tom, how else does he know whats in my room?
EDITED_BY: Colin J (1129577816)
I can interpret it like this:
We have bigger houses but smaller families;
more conveniences, but less time.
Um, I don't. Unless he means conveniences like trains. which are always late which leaves you with less time to get to work.
We have more degrees, but less sense;
more knowledge, but less judgement;
We are full of s**t
more medicines but less healthiness.
We are enjoying life a little too much.
We've been all the way to the moon and back,
but we have trouble crossing the street to meet the new neighbours.
We are just lazy. (And see below)
We have built more computers to hold more information,
to produce more copies than ever,
but we have less communication.
We realised most people aren't worth talking/listening too.
(See above, full of s**t)
We have become long on quantity,
but short on quality.
This I agree with, sorta.
These are times of fast foods but slow digestion.
I think he is having a dig at fat people.
Tall man but short character;
I think he is having a dig at tall people. And calling them uniteresting or bland(or trying to be sly and saying they have small willys, comeing from a guy who doen't even use his
). Not very buddha like.steep profits but shallow relationships.
Never mix buisness and pleasure. Or is that mixing buisness and pleasure. Like hookers.
It is a time when there is much in the window,
but nothing in the room.
He is admitting to being a peeping tom, how else does he know whats in my room?
EDITED_BY: Colin J (1129577816)
SILVER Member
currently mending
493 posts
Location: Bristol, New Zealand
currently mending
493 posts
Location: Bristol, New Zealand
Posted:
'we can see the world. We see it with TV, the Internet, Telephones etc etc.
For us to have access to these things, it appears to have been necessary to screw up the planet.
' We wouldn't have these problems if globalisation hadn't happened. Given a choice between knowing about Global Warming and it not happening then I know which I prefer.'
Globalisation and neoliberalism are products of 70's economics (Friedman et al) and 80's neoconservative politics (Regan Thatcher etc). To suggest that we've only started polluting the planet, or living in an unequal material based society in the last 30 years is ridiculous.
In fact the extent of human based climate change is still only just being understood, as global dimming (basically the amount of smog/burnt coal/other crap we've put into our atmosphere) is now reducing as we improve aspects of our environmental policy (such as car exhaust emmisions).
That doesn't mean we're on course to sort out the world's problems, but to sort any of them out comprehending them is clearly a precondition of any sort of success.
The best way (in my opinion) to help educate the public on issues which corporate profit-related interests (which are then presented by corporate controlled media) clearly differentiate from the well being of both people and planet is to create alternative, non-hierarchial and independent systems of communication. Chomsky describes this process, which allows people to gain a more rounded understanding of contemporary issues as 'intellectual self defence.'
Kinda like people hopefully looking at this discussion, finding it interesting and spending an hour or two doing a bit of independent research into the aspects of the discussion which intrigue them most.
So Rob... You are helping.
Communication is essential to combat the alienated labour and consumption which we are socially subjected to (see Debord, 'The Society of the Spectacle' which in many ways updates Marxist political economy, which though a useful starting point is often invalidated due to the changes society has undergone in the last 150 years). It also serves to combat what Chomsky describes as 'isolation,' the feeling that while you may have issues with the way society operates, you only hear and see corporate controlled broadcast/print media and advertising which serve to normalise the values of society's hegemonic groups.
Once we start communicating... the next step is to become an activist. and in many ways thats when things get a lot tougher. unfortunately words alone aren't enough.
'we can see the world. We see it with TV, the Internet, Telephones etc etc.
For us to have access to these things, it appears to have been necessary to screw up the planet.
' We wouldn't have these problems if globalisation hadn't happened. Given a choice between knowing about Global Warming and it not happening then I know which I prefer.'
Globalisation and neoliberalism are products of 70's economics (Friedman et al) and 80's neoconservative politics (Regan Thatcher etc). To suggest that we've only started polluting the planet, or living in an unequal material based society in the last 30 years is ridiculous.
In fact the extent of human based climate change is still only just being understood, as global dimming (basically the amount of smog/burnt coal/other crap we've put into our atmosphere) is now reducing as we improve aspects of our environmental policy (such as car exhaust emmisions).
That doesn't mean we're on course to sort out the world's problems, but to sort any of them out comprehending them is clearly a precondition of any sort of success.
The best way (in my opinion) to help educate the public on issues which corporate profit-related interests (which are then presented by corporate controlled media) clearly differentiate from the well being of both people and planet is to create alternative, non-hierarchial and independent systems of communication. Chomsky describes this process, which allows people to gain a more rounded understanding of contemporary issues as 'intellectual self defence.'
Kinda like people hopefully looking at this discussion, finding it interesting and spending an hour or two doing a bit of independent research into the aspects of the discussion which intrigue them most.
So Rob... You are helping.
Communication is essential to combat the alienated labour and consumption which we are socially subjected to (see Debord, 'The Society of the Spectacle' which in many ways updates Marxist political economy, which though a useful starting point is often invalidated due to the changes society has undergone in the last 150 years). It also serves to combat what Chomsky describes as 'isolation,' the feeling that while you may have issues with the way society operates, you only hear and see corporate controlled broadcast/print media and advertising which serve to normalise the values of society's hegemonic groups.
Once we start communicating... the next step is to become an activist. and in many ways thats when things get a lot tougher. unfortunately words alone aren't enough.
He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.
Nietzsche
GOLD Member
addict
674 posts
Location: Ohio, USA
addict
674 posts
Location: Ohio, USA
Posted:
It isn't a comparison to "simpler times". It's an observation that though we have advanced so far (and it is advancement... the value you want to PUT on that advancement is secondary), in a lot of ways the world really hasn't changed on a human behavioral level.
If you state a fact about something (like "I was born at such and such a time) it is not necessarily a comparison to other times. And the DL is clearly using it as such here. IE "More computers... LESS communication". However, it isn't necessarily used the same way throughout the whole thing. For instance "Steep profits but shallow relationships" can be taken to mean that we all make a lot more money, but we havn't made more progress in forming relationships as a result, OR that we make more money, and form MORE shallow relationships.
I don't see this "paradox" as a damnation of our age at all. It's a reminder that as we advance we must not loose the human part of ourselves that he (The DL) holds so dear (and so should you darn it! ). A lot of people like to point these things out and use it to say its a result of our advancements. And it is in part, but more because of our REACTIONS to our advancements and the amount of information that comes at us every day than anything else. I take this "paradox" to mean not that we need to return to a simpler life literally, but within ourselves. To echo bender, we must change ourselves before we change the world, but rather a little more toward we must change ourselves TO change the world, because the world is within you. We have all kinds of things to distract you, but don't let them distract you from LIVING.
Of course all this coming from a Buddhist is old hat... :P
And the cynic in me agrees with:
We have built more computers to hold more information,
to produce more copies than ever,
but we have less communication.
* We realised most people aren't worth talking to. *
It isn't a comparison to "simpler times". It's an observation that though we have advanced so far (and it is advancement... the value you want to PUT on that advancement is secondary), in a lot of ways the world really hasn't changed on a human behavioral level.
If you state a fact about something (like "I was born at such and such a time) it is not necessarily a comparison to other times. And the DL is clearly using it as such here. IE "More computers... LESS communication". However, it isn't necessarily used the same way throughout the whole thing. For instance "Steep profits but shallow relationships" can be taken to mean that we all make a lot more money, but we havn't made more progress in forming relationships as a result, OR that we make more money, and form MORE shallow relationships.
I don't see this "paradox" as a damnation of our age at all. It's a reminder that as we advance we must not loose the human part of ourselves that he (The DL) holds so dear (and so should you darn it!
). A lot of people like to point these things out and use it to say its a result of our advancements. And it is in part, but more because of our REACTIONS to our advancements and the amount of information that comes at us every day than anything else. I take this "paradox" to mean not that we need to return to a simpler life literally, but within ourselves. To echo bender, we must change ourselves before we change the world, but rather a little more toward we must change ourselves TO change the world, because the world is within you. We have all kinds of things to distract you, but don't let them distract you from LIVING.Of course all this coming from a Buddhist is old hat... :P
And the cynic in me agrees with:
We have built more computers to hold more information,
to produce more copies than ever,
but we have less communication.
* We realised most people aren't worth talking to. *
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
Sorry Dream, sloppy wording. Read "Urbanization and Globalisation" instead, but one is just the next logical step from the other. I don't say that "All environmental and social problems arose with the advent of Multi-Nationals" but I do say that they have been the worst contributors to things like pollution and exploitation.
The fact remains that the average global temperature has consistently risen over the last 30 years. Can anyone attribute that to anything other than Human Activity?
Funny, for the people apparantly "in charge" of the planet, it seems like it would be better of if our species became extinct.
Sorry Dream, sloppy wording. Read "Urbanization and Globalisation" instead, but one is just the next logical step from the other. I don't say that "All environmental and social problems arose with the advent of Multi-Nationals" but I do say that they have been the worst contributors to things like pollution and exploitation.
The fact remains that the average global temperature has consistently risen over the last 30 years. Can anyone attribute that to anything other than Human Activity?
Funny, for the people apparantly "in charge" of the planet, it seems like it would be better of if our species became extinct.
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
2,895 posts
Location: Cambridge UK
Carpal \'Tunnel
2,895 posts
Location: Cambridge UK
Posted:
[rant start]
A lot of this strikes a chord with me.
did no one else here the news item that said the ice caps would be completely melted in the next seventy years? We're going to enter another ice age.
meanwhile the entire world economy is rooted in oil, which I expect will run out pretty soon (in the next seventy years probably).
America's economy is about due to get royally
ed up, some say this christmas, while China is on the rise.
Question: what will america do when it cannot maintain it's position in the global market?
Nuke the opposition? or descend into total chaos? or maybe both?
The tenets of capitalism focus on the short term gain over the long term plan.
People have simply stopped caring about what happens to the world around them as long as they can live for today, or they have stopped believing in the power to shape their destinies and that of the world as a whole
[end rant]
[rant start]
A lot of this strikes a chord with me.
did no one else here the news item that said the ice caps would be completely melted in the next seventy years? We're going to enter another ice age.
meanwhile the entire world economy is rooted in oil, which I expect will run out pretty soon (in the next seventy years probably).
America's economy is about due to get royally
ed up, some say this christmas, while China is on the rise. Question: what will america do when it cannot maintain it's position in the global market?
Nuke the opposition? or descend into total chaos? or maybe both?
The tenets of capitalism focus on the short term gain over the long term plan.
People have simply stopped caring about what happens to the world around them as long as they can live for today, or they have stopped believing in the power to shape their destinies and that of the world as a whole
[end rant]
Because ActiveAngel sounds like a feminine deodorant
Like sex, I'm much more interesting in real life than online.
'Be the change you want to see in the world around you' - Ghandi
SILVER Member
currently mending
493 posts
Location: Bristol, New Zealand
currently mending
493 posts
Location: Bristol, New Zealand
Posted:
Urbanisation leads to globalisation is quite ambigous.
If you mean that the technological innovations which created the conditions necessary for the industrial revolution would gradually lead to the technological advances which have lead to a system of global reach then perhaps...
However globalisation is more commonly used to denote the current phase of neo-liberal corporate globalisation. When Marx attempted to logically examine and determine the course of soicety back in the 19th Century he envisioned something somewhat different, though it was a global system.
The dominant ideological system represents it's onotological perspective as natural and normative features of human life. In the same ways that in capitalist societies, individuality and competitivity are presented and natural and 'logical' human behavour, communist (well bolshevik... not quite the same but still ideologically disparate from ours) societites presented egalitarianism, and uniformity.
If we think of our current social structure as somehow contradictory to the species natural behavioral patterns we would be more inclined to try and change them.
'The fact remains that the average global temperature has consistently risen over the last 30 years. Can anyone attribute that to anything other than Human Activity?'
Unfortunately yes. People like George Bush, Dick Cheney and Lee Raymond can and do. Not because its true. But because the issue is not presented as serious enough to warrant 'ruining our economy' as politicians and media have generally represented Climate change.
'Funny, for the people apparantly "in charge" of the planet, it seems like it would be better of if our species became extinct. '
Close but not quite. They dont want everyone to die. But if climate change wipes out 95% of the human population in the next 200 years then it will probably mean that they're the ones left (by and large... there might be some kind of feral type dreadlocked poi swinging tribes about). There are reasons for interventions like the Iraq war, and it basically ensures that in the event of global catastrophe we retain the ability to survive at the rest of the world's expense.
Given that the current global poulation is reaching unsusatinable levels (we only have a limited amount of resources on this planet), half the people who have ever been born are still alive and global poulation growth shows no signs of slowing, I find it quite believable that the elite consenus is along the lines of 'well f**k em.'
The question should be whether or not we're going to let them.
Urbanisation leads to globalisation is quite ambigous.
If you mean that the technological innovations which created the conditions necessary for the industrial revolution would gradually lead to the technological advances which have lead to a system of global reach then perhaps...
However globalisation is more commonly used to denote the current phase of neo-liberal corporate globalisation. When Marx attempted to logically examine and determine the course of soicety back in the 19th Century he envisioned something somewhat different, though it was a global system.
The dominant ideological system represents it's onotological perspective as natural and normative features of human life. In the same ways that in capitalist societies, individuality and competitivity are presented and natural and 'logical' human behavour, communist (well bolshevik... not quite the same but still ideologically disparate from ours) societites presented egalitarianism, and uniformity.
If we think of our current social structure as somehow contradictory to the species natural behavioral patterns we would be more inclined to try and change them.
'The fact remains that the average global temperature has consistently risen over the last 30 years. Can anyone attribute that to anything other than Human Activity?'
Unfortunately yes. People like George Bush, Dick Cheney and Lee Raymond can and do. Not because its true. But because the issue is not presented as serious enough to warrant 'ruining our economy' as politicians and media have generally represented Climate change.
'Funny, for the people apparantly "in charge" of the planet, it seems like it would be better of if our species became extinct. '
Close but not quite. They dont want everyone to die. But if climate change wipes out 95% of the human population in the next 200 years then it will probably mean that they're the ones left (by and large... there might be some kind of feral type dreadlocked poi swinging tribes about). There are reasons for interventions like the Iraq war, and it basically ensures that in the event of global catastrophe we retain the ability to survive at the rest of the world's expense.
Given that the current global poulation is reaching unsusatinable levels (we only have a limited amount of resources on this planet), half the people who have ever been born are still alive and global poulation growth shows no signs of slowing, I find it quite believable that the elite consenus is along the lines of 'well f**k em.'
The question should be whether or not we're going to let them.
He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.
Nietzsche
SILVER Member
what goes around comes around. unless you're into stalls.
4,030 posts
Location: Bali, Australia
what goes around comes around. unless you're into stalls.
4,030 posts
Location: Bali, Australia
Posted:
Again, this ontologically provocative series of couplets
A bit like attributing 'twinkle twinkle little star' to the Pope.
Again, this ontologically provocative series of couplets
Written by: newgabe
is a great discussion point, but I doubt it was written by HH Dalai Lama...sounds nothing at all like what he does write.
A bit like attributing 'twinkle twinkle little star' to the Pope.
.....Can't juggle balls but I sure as hell can juggle details....
GOLD Member
still can't believe it's not butter
6,978 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
still can't believe it's not butter
6,978 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
we all we all in agreement that we are highly developed in one way and fair up the creek in another.
Buddhism teaches that the suffering that takes place is due to our behaviour being warped by illusion.
eg buying a bigger house is equated by many to make us happier, then UCOF comes and burns it down, causing unhappiness. Jon's like that, y'see. We live under the illusion of the goals of fleeting happiness.
To be free of this illusion is the basis of Enlightenment (This is Nirvana, not necessarily a place or a rad deattle grunge band, but a freedom from such burden.)
reincarnation plays a central role in the Tibetan tradition fo Buddhism (which H.E. Tenzin Gyatso leads as the physical manifestation of the Buddha of Compassion, Chenzereig)
It is believed that the world we now occupy is 'samsara' containing the six realms of existence (the realm of the gods, titans, humans, animals, hungry ghosts, demons) that by continually being reborn amongst each realm (the next realm being decided by past & present karma) we have teh beautiful chance to gain merit for the next life.
The goal of buddhism is to gradually reach the stage where our bardo (spirit) is finally free of the illusion, negativity that causes suffering.
before you ask "where's the beef?" i say ask Jon,
also before you ask "how do i get off this crazy reincarnation wheel?!" i say:
many Tibetan buddhists have followed the teachings of the original Buddha, the Sakyumani Buddha and have made the beautiful decision to remain in Samsara and be reincarnated as a Lama, for the purpose of being a physically present guide to grant compassionate aid those still stuck (ever try to learn a fishtail without a teacher present?!). Needless to say, in the already incredibly reverent culture of Tibet, These special 'Rinpoche' individuals are most cherished.
but you needn't have to score a special relationship with a Lama or even be in a sangha (religious community)
you can begin the work of diminishing your suffering this second by following the Four Noble truths about suffering (part of the Dharma (teachings)):
first noble truth:
dukkha
"life means suffering"
the very fact that you are reborn implies that your mind currently places illusion in such a way that it causes you to suffer. This karma guides you to be reborn in the realms of suffering (Samsara)
second noble truth:
samudaya
"Suffering arises from attachment to desire"
self explanatory really, desire, attachment causes expectation -often unrealistic- which when not realised, causes suffering.
third noble truth:
nirodha
"The cessation of suffering is attainable"
One must accept the truth that one can *truly* end the suffering. After all, it is only by accepting the chance that something is do-able that the possibility ripens. Great deeds need great possibility.
fourth noble truth:
magga
"The way to cease suffering Alien Project is through an 8 step process"
this Dharma would take like half an hour to properly disperse, but to skim it, it'd suffice to say that it involves a mindfulness of:Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech , Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort , Right Mindfulness, Right Concentration. All of which just makes *plain sense* to a compassionate individual. I would add right staff, cus you *know* staff rocks.
Buddhism isn't about worshipping icons, living life as a preparation for a promised heaven, it is about acting with common sense and compassion to live happier right now. i seem to likes it alot!
ps i love tibetan buddhism! (and staff)
we all we all in agreement that we are highly developed in one way and fair up the creek in another.
Buddhism teaches that the suffering that takes place is due to our behaviour being warped by illusion.
eg buying a bigger house is equated by many to make us happier, then UCOF comes and burns it down, causing unhappiness. Jon's like that, y'see. We live under the illusion of the goals of fleeting happiness.
To be free of this illusion is the basis of Enlightenment (This is Nirvana, not necessarily a place or a rad deattle grunge band, but a freedom from such burden.)
reincarnation plays a central role in the Tibetan tradition fo Buddhism (which H.E. Tenzin Gyatso leads as the physical manifestation of the Buddha of Compassion, Chenzereig)
It is believed that the world we now occupy is 'samsara' containing the six realms of existence (the realm of the gods, titans, humans, animals, hungry ghosts, demons) that by continually being reborn amongst each realm (the next realm being decided by past & present karma) we have teh beautiful chance to gain merit for the next life.
The goal of buddhism is to gradually reach the stage where our bardo (spirit) is finally free of the illusion, negativity that causes suffering.
before you ask "where's the beef?" i say ask Jon,
also before you ask "how do i get off this crazy reincarnation wheel?!" i say:
many Tibetan buddhists have followed the teachings of the original Buddha, the Sakyumani Buddha and have made the beautiful decision to remain in Samsara and be reincarnated as a Lama, for the purpose of being a physically present guide to grant compassionate aid those still stuck (ever try to learn a fishtail without a teacher present?!). Needless to say, in the already incredibly reverent culture of Tibet, These special 'Rinpoche' individuals are most cherished.
but you needn't have to score a special relationship with a Lama or even be in a sangha (religious community)
you can begin the work of diminishing your suffering this second by following the Four Noble truths about suffering (part of the Dharma (teachings)):
first noble truth:
dukkha
"life means suffering"
the very fact that you are reborn implies that your mind currently places illusion in such a way that it causes you to suffer. This karma guides you to be reborn in the realms of suffering (Samsara)
second noble truth:
samudaya
"Suffering arises from attachment to desire"
self explanatory really, desire, attachment causes expectation -often unrealistic- which when not realised, causes suffering.
third noble truth:
nirodha
"The cessation of suffering is attainable"
One must accept the truth that one can *truly* end the suffering. After all, it is only by accepting the chance that something is do-able that the possibility ripens. Great deeds need great possibility.
fourth noble truth:
magga
"The way to cease suffering Alien Project is through an 8 step process"
this Dharma would take like half an hour to properly disperse, but to skim it, it'd suffice to say that it involves a mindfulness of:Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech , Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort , Right Mindfulness, Right Concentration. All of which just makes *plain sense* to a compassionate individual. I would add right staff, cus you *know* staff rocks.
Buddhism isn't about worshipping icons, living life as a preparation for a promised heaven, it is about acting with common sense and compassion to live happier right now. i seem to likes it alot!
ps i love tibetan buddhism! (and staff)
Laugh Often, Smile Much, Post lolcats Always
small member
116 posts
Location: Hastings
116 posts
Location: Hastings
Posted:
I like everything about buddhism except for the reicaration part, the denial of natural human emotionial states, and not eating things you have to kill(mmmm bacon). I never could figure out where 'new' souls came from.
Other than that it gets a thumbs up from me. especially zen. which has fried my brain (like bacon, mmmmm)
I like everything about buddhism except for the reicaration part, the denial of natural human emotionial states, and not eating things you have to kill(mmmm bacon). I never could figure out where 'new' souls came from.
Other than that it gets a thumbs up from me. especially zen. which has fried my brain (like bacon, mmmmm)
SILVER Member
Pooh-Bah
1,626 posts
Location: Southampton, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,626 posts
Location: Southampton, United Kingdom
Posted:
Thank you for savingme the effort of finding a concise way of putting that.
I would rather humans didn't have the ability to screw the entire world in a matter of hours, if it came to it, that modern technology gives them.
Also, all these responses make no account (as far as I can see, sorry if i missed them but it's early) for the huge, huge population of humans on the planet as a result of modern medicine which is putting phenomenal strain on every natural resource the planet has, at the expense of every other lifeform.
References to the industrial revolution - well, as I said before, the Industrial revolution is not representative of what I was talking about when mentioning past ways of life, regardless of how pivotal a moment it was in human development. I believe that the vast webs of civilisation are all ultimately based on desire for power, wealth and will fall. People put their faith in a society which will eventually collapse. It has happened throughout history, and anyone who doesn't believe our current western society is exactly the same is, in my opinion, a bit naive,
There are too many of us - we are destroying the planet. This is because of modern technology. We live too long and too few very young people die. Modern medicine is totally destroying the balance we have maintained evolutionarily as animals. Because it has happened so rapidly humans can still have one child each year (or thereabouts). Everywhere else in nature populations control themselves. You have a litter and birthing interval appropriate to acheive the status quo. And in the past 200 years (see? I do reference the industrial revolution) human population has exploded to basically epidemic proportions.
Because there are so many of us there are not enough natural resources to go around - hence the absolutely incredible levels of poverty in the third world, where famine and disease are wiping out hundreds of thousands of people every year. Too many people - same one planet.
Hence my desire for a return to a harmonious way of living with the planet, a la several millenia ago.
Written by: Sethis
Right, we can see the world. We see it with TV, the Internet, Telephones etc etc.
For us to have access to these things, it appears to have been necessary to screw up the planet.
Thank you for savingme the effort of finding a concise way of putting that.
I would rather humans didn't have the ability to screw the entire world in a matter of hours, if it came to it, that modern technology gives them.
Also, all these responses make no account (as far as I can see, sorry if i missed them but it's early) for the huge, huge population of humans on the planet as a result of modern medicine which is putting phenomenal strain on every natural resource the planet has, at the expense of every other lifeform.
References to the industrial revolution - well, as I said before, the Industrial revolution is not representative of what I was talking about when mentioning past ways of life, regardless of how pivotal a moment it was in human development. I believe that the vast webs of civilisation are all ultimately based on desire for power, wealth and will fall. People put their faith in a society which will eventually collapse. It has happened throughout history, and anyone who doesn't believe our current western society is exactly the same is, in my opinion, a bit naive,
There are too many of us - we are destroying the planet. This is because of modern technology. We live too long and too few very young people die. Modern medicine is totally destroying the balance we have maintained evolutionarily as animals. Because it has happened so rapidly humans can still have one child each year (or thereabouts). Everywhere else in nature populations control themselves. You have a litter and birthing interval appropriate to acheive the status quo. And in the past 200 years (see? I do reference the industrial revolution) human population has exploded to basically epidemic proportions.
Because there are so many of us there are not enough natural resources to go around - hence the absolutely incredible levels of poverty in the third world, where famine and disease are wiping out hundreds of thousands of people every year. Too many people - same one planet.
Hence my desire for a return to a harmonious way of living with the planet, a la several millenia ago.
What a wonderful miracle if only we could look through each other's eyes for an instant.
Thoreau
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
Reincarnation is, arguably, more to do with the cultures that buddhism evolved in, rather than an essential aspect of buddhism itself (many of the forms of developing western buddhism, for example, place no emphasis on the reality, or otherwise, of reincarnation).
Many buddhists are not vegetarian either.
As for denial of natural human emotional states- buddhism (particularly the evolving forms of western zen) does not deny them- it focuses on coming to terms with those states which are on the causal chain leading to suffering.
With the ultimate aim of understanding that causal chain, to the extent that those states can no longer cause suffering (or at least to minimise it).
Written by: Colin J
I like everything about buddhism except for the reicaration part, the denial of natural human emotionial states, and not eating things you have to kill(mmmm bacon). I never could figure out where 'new' souls came from.
Other than that it gets a thumbs up from me. especially zen. which has fried my brain (like bacon, mmmmm)
Reincarnation is, arguably, more to do with the cultures that buddhism evolved in, rather than an essential aspect of buddhism itself (many of the forms of developing western buddhism, for example, place no emphasis on the reality, or otherwise, of reincarnation).
Many buddhists are not vegetarian either.
As for denial of natural human emotional states- buddhism (particularly the evolving forms of western zen) does not deny them- it focuses on coming to terms with those states which are on the causal chain leading to suffering.
With the ultimate aim of understanding that causal chain, to the extent that those states can no longer cause suffering (or at least to minimise it).
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
SILVER Member
addict
449 posts
Location: Australia
addict
449 posts
Location: Australia
Posted:
I've heard random buddhist quotes in psytrance before, but i've never heard a psytrance artist mentioned randomly in the four noble truths. My hat off to you!
Nice post btw.
Written by: bender
fourth noble truth:
magga
"The way to cease suffering Alien Project is through an 8 step process"
I've heard random buddhist quotes in psytrance before, but i've never heard a psytrance artist mentioned randomly in the four noble truths. My hat off to you!
Nice post btw.
Pooh-Bah
1,662 posts
Location: Bristol
1,662 posts
Location: Bristol
Posted:
WIld Child - i thnk that is the best interpretation i have heard yet. We need to see that all this technology & stuff aren't problems or solutions in themselves, but tools. unfortunately, we have buttons under important desks that could kill everyone on the planet in not very long....but we also have paypal which lets you donate to oxfam.
WIld Child - i thnk that is the best interpretation i have heard yet. We need to see that all this technology & stuff aren't problems or solutions in themselves, but tools. unfortunately, we have buttons under important desks that could kill everyone on the planet in not very long....but we also have paypal which lets you donate to oxfam.
I had a dream that my friend had a
strong-bad pop up book,
it was the book of my dreams.
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
Tao Star: Reminder: Do NOT get the two confused
Dream: Well, IMO wage based labour (as opposed to subsistence) goes hand in hand with the early stages of urbanization. This system itself begins the focus on "Help yourself at the cost of others". The Capitalist philosophy which emerged from this is what I hold *directly* responsible for the propagation of selfishness and lack of empathy that seems to be the norm in corporate hierarchies. Like I said, they're the people with a stranglehold on the economy of the world.
Bender: bearing in mind that Tibetan Buddhism is just one of many schools of Buddhist thought, then yeah, it's all cool. However there are schools with significantly different views, such as Theravada, Mahayana and, as Colin J pointed out, Zen. I think they all have a good handle on how to behave (for the laity anyway, I don't like some of the rules regarding monks) but still aren't quite there... that said, they're one of the best religions in the world.
Tao Star: Reminder: Do NOT get the two confused
Dream: Well, IMO wage based labour (as opposed to subsistence) goes hand in hand with the early stages of urbanization. This system itself begins the focus on "Help yourself at the cost of others". The Capitalist philosophy which emerged from this is what I hold *directly* responsible for the propagation of selfishness and lack of empathy that seems to be the norm in corporate hierarchies. Like I said, they're the people with a stranglehold on the economy of the world.
Bender: bearing in mind that Tibetan Buddhism is just one of many schools of Buddhist thought, then yeah, it's all cool. However there are schools with significantly different views, such as Theravada, Mahayana and, as Colin J pointed out, Zen. I think they all have a good handle on how to behave (for the laity anyway, I don't like some of the rules regarding monks) but still aren't quite there... that said, they're one of the best religions in the world.
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
small member
116 posts
Location: Hastings
116 posts
Location: Hastings
Posted:
Thats why I like zen. Its about honing your mind into a scalpel. And truely understanding why you think or feel a certain way and comtemplating where all that comes from. So you don't deny yourself parts of your mind or dissmiss thoughts you try to understand them. Then maybe you can keep a healthy mind, and not dwell or entertain crap thoughts. your just yep thats that and I thinking like this because....and thats enough of that, bing and its banished. No need to have that crap floating about in my head. So your right about zen, its not denial.
Written by: onewheeldave
As for denial of natural human emotional states- buddhism (particularly the evolving forms of western zen) does not deny them- it focuses on coming to terms with those states which are on the causal chain leading to suffering.
With the ultimate aim of understanding that causal chain, to the extent that those states can no longer cause suffering (or at least to minimise it).
Thats why I like zen. Its about honing your mind into a scalpel. And truely understanding why you think or feel a certain way and comtemplating where all that comes from. So you don't deny yourself parts of your mind or dissmiss thoughts you try to understand them. Then maybe you can keep a healthy mind, and not dwell or entertain crap thoughts. your just yep thats that and I thinking like this because....and thats enough of that, bing and its banished. No need to have that crap floating about in my head. So your right about zen, its not denial.
© 1998 - 2025 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com