Guest guest Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 N: I do not agree with the point you are making, Pete. P: That is because you missed my point again. N: Unless Hur has some sort of computer-generated program operating and I am interacting with that and not people, I cannot agree with you. P: Of course, there are human bodies and brains writing these words, but they don't own the words, or the thoughts behind the words. These word and ideas are learned things passed on from one generation to the next since language appeared. No need to feel attacked when words we wrote get attacked. N: It *was* incomprehensible to me that one human being could view another human being's symbolic representations that way. So, when on occasion another person warned me that I was just being given words by someone, I did not understand what they meant. It turns out the person who warned me was so right that is all the person who believes as you say you do was giving me words, just words. There was absolutely nothing behind them. No love, caring, loyalty, support, or honesty. P: Notice that in order to feel loved when you read words on a screen, you need to make the following unwarranted assumptions: a) That the person sitting at the other computer has fashioned, out of reading your emails, the same image of Noel that Noel has of himself. b) That the love that person feels for that image of Noel means he loves Noel, rather that he loves only his own ideas about Noel. c) That reading " I love you Noel " on a screen means that the person who wrote those words was really feeling love for Noel when he wrote them. d) That the love those words evoke in you is the same love that such person feels for you. All that is not much different that believing that when you read Romeo and Juliet you really know them and can feel their love. It's all the same verbal mirage. I hope you get all the love and support you need from the people you meet in the flesh. Here on the internet, there are no enemies, no friends, no hate, no love. Just words on a screen and the meaning and feelings you provide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 Nisargadatta , Pete S <pedsie5 wrote: > > N: I do not agree with the point you are making, Pete. > > P: That is because you missed my point again. > > N: Unless Hur has some sort of computer-generated program > operating and I am interacting with that and not > people, I cannot agree with you. > > P: Of course, there are human bodies and brains writing > these words, but they don't own the words, or the thoughts > behind the words. These word and ideas are learned > things passed on from one generation to the next > since language appeared. No need to feel attacked when > words we wrote get attacked. > > N: It *was* incomprehensible to me that one human being > could view another human being's symbolic > representations that way. So, when on occasion > another person warned me that I was just being given > words by someone, I did not understand what they > meant. It turns out the person who warned me was so > right that is all the person who believes as you say > you do was giving me words, just words. There was > absolutely nothing behind them. No love, caring, > loyalty, support, or honesty. > > P: Notice that in order to feel loved when you read > words on a screen, you need to make the following > unwarranted assumptions: > > a) That the person sitting at the other computer has > fashioned, out of reading your emails, the same image > of Noel that Noel has of himself. > > b) That the love that person feels for that image of > Noel means he loves Noel, rather that he loves only > his own ideas about Noel. > > c) That reading " I love you Noel " on a screen means > that the person who wrote those words was really feeling > love for Noel when he wrote them. > > d) That the love those words evoke in you is the same > love that such person feels for you. > > All that is not much different that believing that when > you read Romeo and Juliet you really know them and > can feel their love. It's all the same verbal mirage. > > I hope you get all the love and support you need from the > people you meet in the flesh. Here on the internet, there > are no enemies, no friends, no hate, no love. Just words > on a screen and the meaning and feelings you provide. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 Nisargadatta , Pete S <pedsie5 wrote: > > Noel wrote: > > > > > > > You write 'words on a screen' are somehow > > different > > > from 'a conversation with someone we personally > > > know.' How can I ever *know* another person? I do > > > not see how that is possible. > > > > Pete wrote: > > > P: Knowing another accurately and forever is > > impossible, > > as knowing the shape of tomorrow's clouds is > > impossible. > > > N: Pete, I was very confused by your above response to my > message: Words on a Screen, because in the response > you are writing esstentially the same thing I am. > Then I noticed you attributed your own words to me > with the little " N: " : > > P: Noel, you're missing the point! They are not my > words or yours. They are just words on a screen. > This " my words " and " your words " is the very cause > of mental hurt and reactivity. > is it not of " mental hurt and reactivity " that " Pete " want to explain all this nice (dream-)words.....to the imaginary " N " ....? an entity " who " isn't involved in any " mental hurt and reactivity " don't try/need/is attached to..... to explain something to an imaginary " other one " ... in reality....there is nothing to explain to anybody.... this words now....written on the screen.....are written by " Marc " ....who don't feel to write to anybody.....except to an " idea " of a conversation between " Pete " and " N " ....... the only reason words are written.....is because we are One..... appearing to be in endless move.... just like the ocean only appear to move......in " reading/writing " waves......of It Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 This thread provides a perfect illustration, for anyone who cares to look close enough, of what communication is *not*. What is interesting to me, personally, is how I have benefited from my part in it even though the *words on the screen* containing the point I was attempting to make were either not understood, or denied, ignored, and in some cases I think distorted. My point was that one cannot *know* another person (period). Whether communicating with them in-person or in cyber-space. In the process, among other things, I have learned more about how to quickly spot some features in communication, which will save me lots of time in the future, both in cyber-space and in-person. The Medium is The Message, er Massage... Noel --- Pete S <pedsie5 wrote: > N: I do not agree with the point you are making, > Pete. > > P: That is because you missed my point again. > > N: Unless Hur has some sort of computer-generated > program > operating and I am interacting with that and not > people, I cannot agree with you. > > P: Of course, there are human bodies and brains > writing > these words, but they don't own the words, or the > thoughts > behind the words. These word and ideas are learned > things passed on from one generation to the next > since language appeared. No need to feel attacked > when > words we wrote get attacked. > > N: It *was* incomprehensible to me that one human > being > could view another human being's symbolic > representations that way. So, when on occasion > another person warned me that I was just being > given > words by someone, I did not understand what they > meant. It turns out the person who warned me was > so > right that is all the person who believes as you > say > you do was giving me words, just words. There was > absolutely nothing behind them. No love, caring, > loyalty, support, or honesty. > > P: Notice that in order to feel loved when you read > words on a screen, you need to make the following > unwarranted assumptions: > > a) That the person sitting at the other computer has > fashioned, out of reading your emails, the same > image > of Noel that Noel has of himself. > > b) That the love that person feels for that image of > Noel means he loves Noel, rather that he loves only > his own ideas about Noel. > > c) That reading " I love you Noel " on a screen > means > that the person who wrote those words was really > feeling > love for Noel when he wrote them. > > d) That the love those words evoke in you is the > same > love that such person feels for you. > > All that is not much different that believing that > when > you read Romeo and Juliet you really know them and > can feel their love. It's all the same verbal > mirage. > > I hope you get all the love and support you need > from the > people you meet in the flesh. Here on the internet, > there > are no enemies, no friends, no hate, no love. Just > words > on a screen and the meaning and feelings you > provide. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 it is a " happening " ... tune in, drop in... and let bygones be bygone mirror neurons and atoms be kundalini energy shaktifying and defying distance and space slipping into deft fingers playing a new concerto on the strings of our bodies in cyberspace. It feels so good...to be real, on the other side...of the mountain, breathing...breathing... the Aum of One. ;-) Nisargadatta , Noel <noel_beau wrote: > > This thread provides a perfect illustration, for > anyone who cares to look close enough, of what > communication is *not*. > > What is interesting to me, personally, is how I have > benefited from my part in it even though the *words on > the screen* containing the point I was attempting to > make were either not understood, or denied, ignored, > and in some cases I think distorted. > > My point was that one cannot *know* another person > (period). Whether communicating with them in-person > or in cyber-space. > > In the process, among other things, I have learned > more about how to quickly spot some features in > communication, which will save me lots of time in the > future, both in cyber-space and in-person. > > The Medium is The Message, er Massage... > > Noel > > --- Pete S <pedsie5 wrote: > > > N: I do not agree with the point you are making, > > Pete. > > > > P: That is because you missed my point again. > > > > N: Unless Hur has some sort of computer-generated > > program > > operating and I am interacting with that and not > > people, I cannot agree with you. > > > > P: Of course, there are human bodies and brains > > writing > > these words, but they don't own the words, or the > > thoughts > > behind the words. These word and ideas are learned > > things passed on from one generation to the next > > since language appeared. No need to feel attacked > > when > > words we wrote get attacked. > > > > N: It *was* incomprehensible to me that one human > > being > > could view another human being's symbolic > > representations that way. So, when on occasion > > another person warned me that I was just being > > given > > words by someone, I did not understand what they > > meant. It turns out the person who warned me was > > so > > right that is all the person who believes as you > > say > > you do was giving me words, just words. There was > > absolutely nothing behind them. No love, caring, > > loyalty, support, or honesty. > > > > P: Notice that in order to feel loved when you read > > words on a screen, you need to make the following > > unwarranted assumptions: > > > > a) That the person sitting at the other computer has > > fashioned, out of reading your emails, the same > > image > > of Noel that Noel has of himself. > > > > b) That the love that person feels for that image of > > Noel means he loves Noel, rather that he loves only > > his own ideas about Noel. > > > > c) That reading " I love you Noel " on a screen > > means > > that the person who wrote those words was really > > feeling > > love for Noel when he wrote them. > > > > d) That the love those words evoke in you is the > > same > > love that such person feels for you. > > > > All that is not much different that believing that > > when > > you read Romeo and Juliet you really know them and > > can feel their love. It's all the same verbal > > mirage. > > > > I hope you get all the love and support you need > > from the > > people you meet in the flesh. Here on the internet, > > there > > are no enemies, no friends, no hate, no love. Just > > words > > on a screen and the meaning and feelings you > > provide. > > > > > > > > > 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.