Re: Betrayel

slider wrote:
> one wrote:
>> slider wrote:
>>> one wrote:
>>>
>>>> When winners exist, losers exist
>>>> which sounds kinda like a game.
>>>
>>> ### - debating isn't a game,
>>
>> If, for you, it isn't or
>> by definition it isn't, then,
>> it might be semantics or
>> simply how you see.
>>
>> The debate that is a debate
>> might be great or simply for fun, imo.
>
>### - that movie is based on a true story,

Okay.

> it actually happened, 

Okay.

>a lowly  
>black college beat white harvard university in a debate about what the  
>definition of morality is and is not,

What is, what was, is and was.

People used to, own, people, naturally.
Now-a-daze people, own, other animals and
apparently, on average may deem it, okay.

Fish in tanks, birds in cages, dogs on leashes
cats kept in houses and horses whipped,
raced and who dares to say right is
wrong and rungs ring a bell eh.

> that regardless of everything being  
>against them in a white man's world 

Stereotype noted.

>the higher principles won the day and  
>the so-called white version of morality lost... 

Not sure about the topic at this point.

>much of this later  
>contributing to the civil rights movement that argues everyone is  
>deserving of good/fair treatment and not just a privileged few...

Animal rights. Children's rights. Women's rights.

When right exists, everyone knows, wrong emerges.

The Tao Te Ching, Chapter 2, could apply.

>iow: this is an example of how human knowledge advances on a daily basis  
>in the daily waking world, and it applies to both nations and to  
>individuals...

Teh struggles continue. Teh, aka Te/De,
at times translated as Virtue, Power, may
be viewed as emerging after the Way is lost.

>>> it's an intelligent way of getting at the
>>> truth of an issue, a win-win scenario for both sides because everyone
>>> comes out the better for it even if they lose the debate,
>>
>> To surrender to win occurs at times.
>>
>> To let go and allow to be. A question
>> emerges regarding higher powers or a
>> Higher Power if there is a singularity.
>
>### - on the human stage just letting things be results in the strong  
>ruling the weak and the law of 'fist' (as in might is right etc) ruling  
>the world, that being exactly what the nazi's believed in... and if the  
>world hadn't gotten together and opposed them we'd all be speaking german  
>now and going to military schools!

The world sounds kinda like a thing. Who your, we, is,
who would be speaking German if not some other language
might be a kind of a sort of a mental noun-thing. Ore knots.

>e.g., you mention the tao fairly often as being a narrative 

Tao is a word.
I wouldn't say Tao is a narrative.

>you like/are attracted to? 

The newsgroup, alt.philosophy.taoism
is the group from which one is posting. One being
me of all beings as wells well and dwellings vary.

>(nada wrong with that) but under the nazis anything like  
>that would have been banned and eventually eradicated
>
>that struggle is still continuing btw...

Prior to reading how it still remains unstill instills.

To have a cause at times is able to motivate people.

>>> the main thing
>>> is the argument has evolved some, and even if nothing definitive is
>>> arrived at, at least one argument (the losing one) has been dismissed  
>>> from
>>> the equation no matter how much appeal (emotional or otherwise) it might
>>> have previously had... and overall that's an advance see?
>>
>> Given various presumptions, yes.
>> Science and mathematics may use such a way.
>>
>> Psychology might depend more on a society
>> in terms of what is defined as well or ill.
>>
>> Debates about what is right and/or wrong
>> might change over time, reverse, modified, etc.
>
>### - doesn't matter what culture you come from, some things are universal  
>like don't do any harm, or don't be a low life...

If such a paradigm is your, universal,
then, t'hats your hat, flag and/or struggle
unless it isn't a struggle.

To be content could be a Taoist mode.

Teh, De, Te, emerges after Tao, aka Dao is lost.

>>> both sides get a
>>> win regardless of the outcome because knowledge has been advanced a
>>> fraction...
>>
>> Seeing as how you appear to see debate happening,
>> thus far, in this thread, what new knowedge have you seen?
>
>### - not much, yet (smile...) there's a certain inertia that has to be  
>overcome/resisted first as people are sticklers for what they know, or  
>think/believe they know, so being opened minded has to come first before  
>anything new can enter in (ref. old zen story about needing to first empty  
>one's cup)

Okay.

>i mean, i look around here and everyone's cups are already filled to  
>overflowing, there's no room for anything more or different, people don't  
>like/resent anything 'different', they like to feel that they've gots it  
>all nailed down already...

I don't know about, everyone. Nor everyone's cup
being as you say it appears to you to be.

You appear to have a projection screen projecting screens
that screen what apears to you to be, stereotyping.

>>> there's a very nice movie about it that explains the above in detail
>>>
>>> just cut through all the hollywood-esq bs added to sell movies, and at  
>>> the
>>> heart of it there's human awareness, discipline & advancement...
>>>
>>> https://ok.ru/video/2387686132251
>>
>> Website has something about cookies being required.
>>
>>> (an important movie)
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Debaters
>>
>> No idea how that relates to WILD nor Christ
>> or cosmic consciousness, mental illness, healing
>> the world or people who live on a surface.
>>
>> Some people see the world as in trouble,
>> the end is near, paranoia may be their mode.
>> Fear might be a driving energy for them.
>
>### - the tibetan buddhists have a nice story/myth they circulate, it's  
>about when a 3rd of the world has actually 'reached' enlightenment, and  
>another 3rd is actually on a genuine road 'to' enlightenment, then  
>something wonderful will occur and the last 3rd - the hardest/most  
>difficult of all to enlighten: all the pigs & fishes heh - will be somehow  
>miraculously drawn-up into it via a kind of siphon-effect, and then the  
>whole world will be enlightened! (nice story huh)

Sounds good. 
Reminds one of a story in the Chuang-tzu
about how the fish are happy.

>> As for Taoism seeing
>> as how that's a group in to which this cross-
>> posted thread continues and I post from,
>> a technique is to not try to win, grow
>> nor to change the world.
>>
>> The world is said to be sacred.
>> Trying to change it is not advised.
>
>### - are you suggesting/saying that the tibetan buddhists are in error  
>working to enlighten the whole world? that it's not advisable?? 

Paradigms vary.

I was saying what a saying is
given a Taoist paradigm, imo.

>or does  
>that perhaps only apply to those who don't really know what they're doing,  
>an injunction as such to those people to wait until they 'do' know what  
>they're doing!

When being spontaneous, one does.
When being drawn by a cause, one does.

How to do without doing, to be in the Zone, 
to transcend right and wrong could be an other
mode and still yet suggest a duality exists.

>it's true, however, that there's some who don't get involved for whatever  
>reasons of their own, be it religious or otherwise they remain  
>indifferent/don't take students for example... others, however, take a  
>more active hand, trying to add to the quota of already enlightened and/or  
>setting students on a road that leads to it...

Some people may appreciate peace of mind,
to be at peace in their heart. Others fight
for what they know is right and wrong.

A so-called, mentally ill, so-called, individual 
might not like taking meds nor be forced to
and stop taking them for a spell.

Some people prefer to function in a culture.

What appears to me are problematics.
People who post here have bins known.

Whether to soar to higher highs
or stay stuck in normal average mode.

>> Lots of people see what is wrong.
>> They could be called the trouble seers.
>
>### - they could even be policemen kinda thing, an alternate 'kind' of  
>police heh, arresting muggers and stuff and even putting some of them in  
>jail on occasion ;)

When a behavior goes beyond what is
acceptable by a culture, the society does
what is writ given its rules written for a spell.

>> Looking for problems they might be views
>> as being the trouble makers.
>
>### - or conversely: peace-keepers/makers ;)

Lost of people fight for peace.
Oxymorons vary.

>> Looking at sides can be a potential view,
>> toward a form of unity consciousness
>> as compared to forms of duality
>> like what occurs in a debate.
>
>### - now we're cooking :)

Propane?

>> Some people who are diagnosed with mental
>> phenomena might be able to heal others
>> and yet not be able to quite fit with
>> various cultures naturally.
>
>### - iow: don't look for the spiritually advanced among ordinary people,  
>such types are more usually outcasts, tramps, even mentally ill... they  
>never quite 'fit-in', they're outsiders looking in...

I often see the most spiritually advance among ordinary people
as well as among other people, given an aye to sea.

>> Theirs could be a difficult Road, Way, Tao.
>
>### - one accepts that the life of a policemen is never an easy one...
>
>after all, they're forced every day to always see both sides of every coin  
>and debate/decide something, it's their work/job ;)

Whether, they, are forced, choose, have a free form
of will, desire and/or knot could be semantics.

>> Some Taoists might be reclusive, like shamans
>> except different. To find a Tao, a Way, that works
>> for a so-called individual may take time for
>> time beings tend to be normal.
>
>### - anyone can sit on the fence and do nada (lol people spend 'years'  
>learning to do nada), it takes a certain kind of courage, however, to come  
>back and work in the world, to bring their enlightenment 'to' the world  
>instead of maybe just keeping it all to themselves?

Reminds one of arhats.

>i like the bodhisattva story... i mean, here was a dude who'd reached  
>enlightenment! actually made it all the way! and he could have presumably  
>just gone-off doing all the incredible things enlightened people can  
>probably do with such gifts... his problem was that he clearly saw that  
>humanity had nothing, nada, were spiritually poverty stricken with no hope  
>of ever finding anything, zip! and that kinda hurt him ya see?

I see a story you appear to recall.

An impression of mine was that a bodhisattva takes a vow.

>to him it was unthinkable that he could just piss-off to go-live an  
>exalted life of riley while that poor bunch of bastards have nothing  
>whatsoever, and in all likelihood never will...
>
>he had compassion for them, see? or maybe he was just an idiot hah!
>
>either way, he decided to stay with them, and then at least they had 'him'  
>then didn't they!
>
>perforce they loved & revered him for that, of course they did, but he  
>just *couldn't* abandon them, ya know?
>
>only a great being could ever do something like that!

If that's what a great being is, for you, then that's great.

Sounds to me like its more of a martyr/ego trip.
A kind of a partial realization, not a full-fledged mystical
experience of non-duality where there are no, others, etc.

Enlightenment is a word.
What the meaning of it may well vary.

A story in the Chuang-tzu suggests well frogs exist.
Sea turtles have a different perspective.

- thanks again! Cheers!