Guest guest Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 --- Pedsie2 wrote: > Lewis, > > That is a superb post! I agree with hypothesis formation instead of > hysteria. Maybe the word compulsive should be added. Compulsive > hypothesis formation, or compulsive explanatory stories seems like an > inextricable part of being human. > > Pete Hi Pete, As mentioned below hypotheses formation can lead to either suffering or well-being depending what is created, how it is used, and what is done with it after its creation. Compulsive behavior can be said to be due to many different arisings that come to form a condition that supports, fosters compulsions. There are many conditions involved and these differ for each appearance. The compulsion to search for an ultimate answer or believe a conceit exists and to attempt to attain can be broken down into many analytic aspects, that is, all the conditions arising with the compulsion observed. Hypotheses formation, which is an isolated story from what we are and what we need to do to go in living is only one aspect of compulsion. There are others such as hypostasis, attachment, habit, social context, facility with language, feedback, and so on. And it would be interesting to explore how such compulsions arise from the many conditions involved. I usually use my experience to explain since conditions for each appearance is different and these matters are " private " indeed and in my experience are not amenable to broad generalization. Maybe I can tell of former compulsions since I have found that works well; giving something to relate to that is not too abstract. A sort of self dissection in public. Maybe others will join in cutting me up with their favorite tools! Lewis > > Hi Kip, > > > > My starting point is found first in my own encounter and > examination of > > how I make stories. In the Buddhist scripture I find the most > direct > > expression of how language comes into play in the formation of > stories > > and consciousness and self is in Kaccayanagotta Sutta where it > says: > > > > " 'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't > exist': > > That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the > Tathagata > > teaches the Dhamma via the middle: > > > > From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. " > > > > http://ladharma.org/ati/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn12-015.html > > > > > > The appearance of ignorance allows the arising of fabrications, the > > cessation of ignorance ends the arising of fabrications. The > inability > > of Buddhist interpretations to clearly explicate " ignorance " seems > to > > have stymied the enterprise of reversing the 12 steps of dependent > > origination leading to dukkha. It is simply not understood well > enough > > to be elucidated, so that it is clearly fathomed, and thus > possibility > > of the cessation of fabrications becomes readily apparent to the > > senses. > > > > In the Lacanian view, which is altogether complex with the real > meat > > hidden in a forest of very dense conceptual language, there is an > > insight that steps very close to what " ignorance " is though without > > spelling it out, that is the " hole. " The refusal or inability of > Lacan > > to do this is curious. This inability and its resultant expansion > of > > fabrications saddles the elegant aspects of the Lacanian story with > > obsfuscating terminology. It seems quite simple and elegant when > the > > Lacanian story is opened, examined carefully, and revealed. > > > > The Advaita Vedanta story approaches the issue in an amazingly > > convoluted manner by asserting ignorance while denying it, > asserting > > there is no " fundamental ignorance " all is consciousness while > > asserting maya and a number of other pole balancing activities. All > of > > this leads to a number of rigourous paths to the Self or the new > one > > that says just realize the Self that you are without making effort. > The > > Self is a constructed terminus that amounts to a denuded > > awareness/consciousness, which when attained is simply " eyes wide > > open. " The key concept is Nirguna Brahman and practitioners refuse > or > > are unable to see what the story actually says of this. In that > story, > > " ignorance " is unknowingly sitting at back door of Nirguna Brahaman > > (the Self being incorporated in it) and most practitioners seem to > > just stand there never opening it because the dazzling Self > occupies > > their attention. Nirguna Brahman gets little attention, except by a > > few. > > > > So the self, speakerbeing, and self (not Self) of Buddhism, Lacan > and > > Advaita Vedanta are the same and the stories of how they come into > > being are the same in terms of " ignorance. " However, that ignorance > is > > never clearly elucidated in any of these, with Lacan coming the > > closest. This remains a curiosity since the nature of the > " ignorance " > > seems obvious. > > > > Hysteria is the fabrication of unsatisfied desire objects or what I > > prefer to call " hypotheses, " or tentative stories, explanations, > > proposals, suppositions, assumptions, guesses,... used to go on in > > life. Without them we do not do and create beyond reactive survival > of > > the body. Art poetry, literature, music, science, the humanities > would > > be nonexistent and/or stuck without " hysteria " or " hypotheses > > formation, " the sense of what if....and then creating and doing > upon > > it. > > > > As defined, as a story, hysteria is not chronic craving. Chronic > > craving arises due to other conditions, including hysteria. To > confuse > > them is error. > > > > Hysteria is not centered in a specturm or continuum of good or bad, > > right or wrong, attachment and non-attachment, existence and > > nonexistence. > > > > If hysteria or hypotheses formatiom is unrecognized as being done, > it > > leads to problems in living. When recoginized and done well it > leads to > > well-being. > > > > When " hypotheses " or " unsatisfied desire objects " are " hardened > into > > existence beyond their transitory creation, appearance and use " or > > " hypostasis " in the Voegelin sense of the word, then craving for > and > > attachment to them can occur. Before hypostasis how can one crave > or > > attach. Hypotheses formation or hysteria is not chronic craving. > > > > This is one story. Since there is some inflexibility present > regarding > > the term hysteria and its changing connotative and denotative > history, > > I am dropping it in favor of " hypotheses formation " a more neutral > > term. > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > Up Thread | Message Index | View Source | Unwrap Lines Message 11609 > of > 11614 < Previous Message | Next Message > > Message # > > Search: > > > Post Message > > > > > 2005 Inc. All rights reserved. > Privacy Policy - Copyright/IP Policy - Terms of Service - Guidelines > - Help > > 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.