Guest guest Posted November 13, 2004 Report Share Posted November 13, 2004 Deconstruction works not by substituting a set of ideas by another less constricting set, but by questioning the validity of ideas, as a mean to view what could be real. It is not a world view, it brings into question the very necessity to have a world view. If a deconstructionist offers you a scheme, which contradicts your beliefs, it's not in the hope that you would adopt it, but in the hope that by defending your scheme, you would come to see how it caters to your needs, rather than pointing to truth. How any representation of reality inevitably divides it. How more fruitful than to inquire into reality, is the inquiry into the need to represent. The final outcome of deconstruction is not the most spacious unifying world view, but direct seeing without representation. Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 13, 2004 Report Share Posted November 13, 2004 When there is a discussion, and instead of looking through the SUBSTANCE and QUALITY of mutual arguments, focus shifts on classification of one’s opponent or his tools – it could be the less constructive thing for the development/evolution of any idea. Peace … Leo cerosoul <Pedsie2 wrote: Deconstruction works not by substituting a set of ideas by another less constricting set, but by questioning the validity of ideas, as a mean to view what could be real. It is not a world view, it brings into question the very necessity to have a world view. If a deconstructionist offers you a scheme, which contradicts your beliefs, it's not in the hope that you would adopt it, but in the hope that by defending your scheme, you would come to see how it caters to your needs, rather than pointing to truth. How any representation of reality inevitably divides it. How more fruitful than to inquire into reality, is the inquiry into the need to represent. The final outcome of deconstruction is not the most spacious unifying world view, but direct seeing without representation. Pete ** If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: /mygroups?edit=1 Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 14, 2004 Report Share Posted November 14, 2004 Nisargadatta , leo rozumenko <leorozum> wrote: > > > > > When there is a discussion, > > and instead of looking through the SUBSTANCE and QUALITY of mutual arguments, > > focus shifts on classification of one's opponent or his tools – > > > > it could be the less constructive thing > > for the development/evolution of any idea. P: Leo! Did you intend the irony of the last two lines? Is it not the less constructive thing what is needed if deconstruction is going to happen? > > > > Peace … > > > > Leo > > > cerosoul <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: > Deconstruction works not by substituting > a set of ideas by another less constricting > set, but by questioning the validity of > ideas, as a mean to view what could be real. > > It is not a world view, it brings into question > the very necessity to have a world view. > If a deconstructionist offers you a scheme, > which contradicts your beliefs, it's not in > the hope that you would adopt it, but > in the hope that by defending your scheme, > you would come to see how it caters to your > needs, rather than pointing to truth. How > any representation of reality inevitably > divides it. How more fruitful than to inquire > into reality, is the inquiry into the need to > represent. > > The final outcome of deconstruction is not > the most spacious unifying world view, but > direct seeing without representation. > > Pete > > > > > > ** > > If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: > > /mygroups?edit=1 > > Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 15, 2004 Report Share Posted November 15, 2004 I guess everybody could be the ONLY HELPER And has perfect right to enjoy with own approach. So, if you don’t find harmful the shift of focus on categorization - it couldn’t bother me either. Peace... Leo cerosoul <Pedsie2 wrote: Nisargadatta , leo rozumenko <leorozum> wrote: > > When there is a discussion, and instead of looking through the SUBSTANCE/QUALITY of mutual arguments, focus shifts on classification of one's opponent or his tools – it could be the less constructive thing for the development/evolution of any idea. Peace... Leo P: Leo! Did you intend the irony of the last two lines? Is it not the less constructive thing what is needed if deconstruction is going to happen? > > > cerosoul <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: > Deconstruction works not by substituting > a set of ideas by another less constricting > set, but by questioning the validity of > ideas, as a mean to view what could be real. > > It is not a world view, it brings into question > the very necessity to have a world view. > If a deconstructionist offers you a scheme, > which contradicts your beliefs, it's not in > the hope that you would adopt it, but > in the hope that by defending your scheme, > you would come to see how it caters to your > needs, rather than pointing to truth. How > any representation of reality inevitably > divides it. How more fruitful than to inquire > into reality, is the inquiry into the need to > represent. > > The final outcome of deconstruction is not > the most spacious unifying world view, but > direct seeing without representation. > > Pete > > > > > > ** > > If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: > > /mygroups?edit=1 > > Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 15, 2004 Report Share Posted November 15, 2004 Everybody depends on own choice and could be the ONLY HELPER of himself So, if you don’t find harmful some shift of focus on categorization - it couldn’t bother me either. Love to all... Leo cerosoul wrote: Nisargadatta , leo rozumenko wrote: > > When there is a discussion, and instead of looking through the SUBSTANCE/QUALITY of mutual arguments, focus shifts on classification of one's opponent or his tools – it could be the less constructive thing for the development/evolution of any idea. Peace... Leo P: Leo! Did you intend the irony of the last two lines? Is it not the less constructive thing what is needed if deconstruction is going to happen? > > > cerosoul wrote: > Deconstruction works not by substituting > a set of ideas by another less constricting > set, but by questioning the validity of > ideas, as a mean to view what could be real. > > It is not a world view, it brings into question > the very necessity to have a world view. > If a deconstructionist offers you a scheme, > which contradicts your beliefs, it's not in > the hope that you would adopt it, but > in the hope that by defending your scheme, > you would come to see how it caters to your > needs, rather than pointing to truth. How > any representation of reality inevitably > divides it. How more fruitful than to inquire > into reality, is the inquiry into the need to > represent. > > The final outcome of deconstruction is not > the most spacious unifying world view, but > direct seeing without representation. > > Pete > > > > > > ** > > If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: > > /mygroups?edit=1 > > Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 16, 2004 Report Share Posted November 16, 2004 Interesting. But... what you just wrote... was this construction or was it deconstruction? What do you think, Pete? Greetings S. Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: > > Deconstruction works not by substituting > a set of ideas by another less constricting > set, but by questioning the validity of > ideas, as a mean to view what could be real. > > It is not a world view, it brings into question > the very necessity to have a world view. > If a deconstructionist offers you a scheme, > which contradicts your beliefs, it's not in > the hope that you would adopt it, but > in the hope that by defending your scheme, > you would come to see how it caters to your > needs, rather than pointing to truth. How > any representation of reality inevitably > divides it. How more fruitful than to inquire > into reality, is the inquiry into the need to > represent. > > The final outcome of deconstruction is not > the most spacious unifying world view, but > direct seeing without representation. > > Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.