About: searching on-line rudolf steiner documents: matches
The more directly abstract men’s sense of language becomes, the more their souls become cut off from one another. Whatever is abstract is peculiar to the individual. He elaborates it for himself and lives in it as in something identified with his own private ego. This element of abstractedness, it is true, is only perfectly to be achieved in the world of concepts; but to some degree a very near approach to it has been made in words and phrases as actually sensed and used, especially in the languages of civilised nations. - See more at: http://wn.rsarchive.org/Articles/GA036/LngLng_index.html#sthash.AeKzZltk.dpufThe Social Question as a Problem of Soul Life
The Inner Experience of Language - See more at: http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA190/English/LRZ1969/19190328p01.html#sthash.fBzxVNAG.dpuf http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA190/English/LRZ1969/19190328p01.html
Accumulated #SSDD can be chased.
- thought 20922
Hmmmm ….. talk about yourself & how you exemplify your practical training in thought, eh? Talk about your own Ego instead of trying to insult mine.
Maybe try to fix the quote in the middle of a nest of comments too!
The last paragraph from the last page:
In some of the other lectures he talks & shows how to change how to speak verbally instead of how people speak nouns & abstractions.
The manner in which Anthroposophy penetrates our souls, stimulating us to inner soul activity and expanding our vision, is of far more importance than the mere theorizing about that which extends beyond the things of the senses into the spiritual. In this Anthroposophy is truly practical.
of course the methods in the book are not primarily about anthroposophy … but rather how best to think about anything.
incidentally Steiner’s pamplet on Practical Thinking was has influenced my thinking. I have been evolving towards and practicing that kind of thinking ever since i read it in my youth … notwistanding that most of our culture goes in the opposite direction, especially ( i must admit to be honest and specific → ) you.
The more directly abstract men's sense of language becomes, the more their souls become cut off from one another. Whatever is abstract is peculiar to the individual. He elaborates it for himself and lives in it as in something identified with his own private ego. This element of abstractedness, it is true, is only perfectly to be achieved in the world of concepts; but to some degree a very near approach to it has been made in words and phrases as actually sensed and used, especially in the languages of civilised nations.
Incidentally i have been toying with the “→” as a punctuation to explicidly show where one though is about another thoght … it is where one goes meta on something that is already meta. For example: if X is about A ← that may feel true to me ← that is about me and not the sentence.
this may annoy you. ← but i don't apologize for doing it ← yet i will try to minimize my usage.
practical thinking is knowing what you thought is about. which is why i do so very love the URL.
and yes i realize PR presumption of direct knowledge. ← sorry, to me it is just a story, one of many in this naked city.
The feeling & qualia of “I am right” & know something etc does not necessarily lead to knowledge, truth & certainly not wisdom.
The word arrows (not → ) conjure up such pictures & meanings as the below not abstract descriptions of English grammar & sentences. Most of the rest of Abstractia conjures even less.
PS I did not get anything from your statement above except your already-always jousting sameo-samo windmill.
The nasty thing about Abstractia is there is never anything to hold onto – just words pointing to words → at words → ????
If you only point at abstract things there is nothing meaningful for me; respect for the specific doesn’t work if all it points at is more words (Abstractia) & not real world things like apples & brioche & menus of toothless foodie bakings etc.
I remember the Practical Training in Thought exercise of waking each morning and just absorbing the weather outside & the shapes of clouds & so forth without coming to conclusions as to what the weather was going to be & someday one would just grok it. The impulse to publish when the thought just crosses the mind seems contrary to such a process. I notice recently that I could intercept a thought without clothing it in words & that later on it might appear again in some other form which I knew instinctively was the thought in question. The Internet magnet for ideas & thoughts is rather gross comparatively speaking.
does your inquiry into that irritate me? … not really … only if you can find any examples in our current world of those kinds of generalizations, could you bring them to my attention?
does your inquiry into that irritate me? … not really … only if you can find any examples in our current world of those kinds of generalizations, could you bring them to my attention?
then what you did say so very clear as to its meaning, of my words you say, “They are no limit on me” … so very obviously true as not to need to be said at all. I mean how could my words, my story, ever limit you … such a notion wold be quite absorb … we have never had that kind of relationship ...not even close. Your statement stands there so emphatically declaring that your insides are not subject to my inquiries that it almost makes me suspect that you were afraid that they were. But then you go on to talk about my fear … dare i ask how you know my fear? … some presumption perhaps of a story you were told … or maybe your direct experiene of what is inside my soul … but, dear bro are you quite so very sure that you refer to my fear … and not your own? flim flam or rwg ? not so very sure it matters.
i expect you will delete this comment.
I woke this AM ~ 2:30 & was awake trying to ignore the snoring body next to me. I went out to the front room to ponder for a while. I decided to do some za-zen for a while focusing on my breathing. As Usual a conversation was inside but this AM I chose not to use the language to chase any of it. The usually “random” stuff still remained, but I chased it not to clothe it in words. It worked until I gave up the exercise. The material was mostly the concerns of the previous day & the morning before the exercise. I don’t hold any of it as random. Mathematics & especially geometry can remove the apparent randomness & help with the focus. It is not about content, but the will to focus. Apparent randomness is perhaps one being in a nest/tree of intention regarding any purpose one has for the moment.
randomness is certainly relative to something, else it cannot be detected at all. in the case of my biology paper, i wanted my thoughts to occur according to my intentions, but they occurred randomly in relationship to that. In your terms, i held them to occur randomly in relation to my intentions. What you refer to as “the will to focus” is, i believe, the same thing that i refer to as “my intentions”. In other words i call “focusing” the act of controlling the sequence of my thoughts and to what they refer. Do you see it any different than that?
i totally agree that something like math or geometry or science or even writhing itself provides an external anchor … a sequence in relationship to which our thoughts can become aligned and hence not appear random. that is to be the conclusion or take away from my thought 20926.
Of course we can give up the “will” to control the sequence … and consider that sequence just what happens in the moment. Then, as perhaps you observed, there is no randomness at all. Do you see it any different than that?
I did not say I observed the lack of randomness, rather I suspect that lack of focus causes apparent randomness. It is not only a context thingy, but also context caused because purpose is not necessarily linear but more tree-like.
Relative to you thoughts, my thought “then, as perhaps you observed, there is no randomness at all” occurred quite randomly … or so you say. Yet relative my my thoughts it quite followed from you thought, “I don’t hold any of it as random” quite directly.
anyway show me something, like for example the static on a TV screen which is not tuned to a specific channel, and i can tell you whether it appears random to me or not. and i will bet that you can do the same thing and that we will agree on the vast number of such distinctions. that is just an alternative method of arriving at the meaning of a word ← me thinks even a better method.
← a precise measure of randomness
note: an individual pixel is measured relative to the whole.
in “The apparent randomness of thoughts” i was discussing what happens randomly before I get the thought, not afterward. Afterward, like you, i just deal with the thought’s clothing in words – syntax, voice, attitude, etc. in the case of a response to somebody else’s thought, [for example this one], i already have the anchor which provides the focus which filters out randomness. however, the thinking that gets me to the point of knowing that i have a valid response is still fairly well random. but somtimes, i just respond out loud, extemporaneously, having arrived randomly with just a vague notion of what the though will end up actually being after it is represented ← this is an example of such. then, i go back and edit and edit making sure that the respresentation actually does match my intended meaning … mostly take out extra words, but somtimes i add whole new thoughts that better express my vague notions. ← now that is not something can be done when you write, but not when you just think to yourself.
incidentally, i hear your paragraph above as 3 random thoughts. ← sorry about that, please don’t take it as rwg, rather as analysis of how we think together and how those thoughts get thunk.
but you raise a important point → if the process that moves attention from thought to thought spreading out tree like, is, as you say “mostly unconscious”, then is that not the same as saying that, relative to your intention, is it not predictable, hence it is random? ← which is probably the only interesting inquiry of my comment here .
then i must admit that i do not understand the meaning behind the second sentence in your paragraph, “The Monte Carlo Method shows a possible intersetion of random & not”.
that would be kind of like the state of north Carolina passing a law mandating that people use the bathroom according to the sex recorded on their birth certificate. which law can not, nor will not ever be enforced. it is in fact just a story full of sound an fury, signifying nothing.
There is, of course, the special case where one is conscious of being conscious. That does seem to break my pattern. But personally i don’t think it is a very interesting outlying example on which to build a story. To me it feels like a mirror looking at a mirror … like “Chocolates on Chocolates”.
Then you story of consciousness does not say anything … “consciousness is like nothing else. It IS!” can be felt true or not, but makes no difference one way or other. Those are not the kinds of wisdoms which i seek. Then too it does not matter what the senses (or channels from outside to indside) there are … i take into myself what i can get from out there.
Dualism rests on a false conception of what we call knowledge. It divides the whole of reality into two spheres, each of which has its own laws, and it leaves these two worlds standing outside one another.
It is from a Dualism such as this that there arises the distinction between the object of perception and the thing-in-itself, which Kant introduced into philosophy, and which, to the present day, we have not succeeded in expelling. According to our interpretation, it is due to the nature of our organization that a particular object can be given to us only as a percept. Thought transcends this particularity by assigning to each percept its proper place in the world as a whole. As long as we determine the separate parts of the cosmos as percepts, we are simply following, in this sorting out, a law of our subjective constitution. If, however, we regard all percepts, taken together, merely as one part, and contrast with this a second part, viz., the things-in-themselves, then our philosophy is building castles-in-the-air. We are then engaged in mere playing with concepts. We construct an artificial opposition, but we can find no content for the second of these opposites, seeing that no content for a particular thing can be found except in perception.- See more at: http://wn.rsarchive.org/Books/GA004/English/GPP1916/GA004_c08.html#sthash.SIjAGopu.dpuf
your half-cocked commenting notwithstanding. Read the rest of the chapter linked there.
i have a question for you, how do you reconcile your philosophy with your experience when what you perceive as one thing ends up being perceived later as something much more elaborate? And yes i am talking about perception and not conception just in the very same sense as are you. What do you conclude changed, your perception of the thing, or the thing itself?
incidentally identity is a real stickler … unless of course you contrive to throw out logic. wherever “A” appears in a equation, it must refer to the exact same thing … no exceptions. fact is an object and its perception are different things. they are not identical.
Maybe review the sequence of encounter of PR for more light or munge your way back into the darkness of Abstractia.
Concluding from the Tai Shu Commentary
P.2621 #22,1 83-1-2-12-11-14 WED 4 years/5 months before GW’s death
" ... Pristine Realities evolve to Symbols; Logic Language, Logos emanates from the Father, not from Nothing except as it seems, of Tertulian pee; thus "The Heart girt with a Serpent" has parallels in Ontogeny & Phylogeny. If you want to dunk your doughnut, go ahead & dunk it! "it is a lie, this folly against self" - Awareness, Attention is the function of the Ego; Brightness, Brilliance, Luminosity which is measured by Photons increase with Development.
(2462) CONSCIOUSNESS is awareness of the part which self takes in production of a judgment either as cause or effect - cause when I act on another, effect when I act on myself, when my hand touches my head, e.g., "I am a cause - active consciousness; passive consciousness - I am an effect". Believe a cause exists without an effect or vice versa if you like to be mystifyied. The categories of Reality are: number, space, motion, time & judgment; if it be a thing it must have unity, it must be one, or it does not exist. Also it must have extension, speed, persistence & consciousness; these cats or essentials are independent but concomitant; the thing is its component essentials; there is no "ding an sich". From here we can go to the subject of "Electricity" & what happens to make it positive or negative, the yang & the yin!"
people can see an elephant from different points of view … those views of the elephant are not the elephant.
and strangely enought an excellent example of the map not being the territory . one way to falsly eliminate that problem is to just declare, with dint of your authority, that the map IS the territory. hmmm … i wonder who is doing that?
Yes, but so? I get that souls are cut off from each other … and in fact, this is the normal state of things. We build connections. Often it is better to actually build connections by having abstract words so that people stay in rapport (see #NLP), than it is to disharmonize for the purpose of maintaining your individual point of view … which at best leads to #rwg.
I am not sure what conditions existed that caused #RS to say these words in this way in circa 1900 … but I am fairly sure he would be saying them in a different way, not negating them, but finding their evolved place of context, if he were to say them in our time.
there is a lot of wiggel room in generalizations … which i why i #love examples … and specificity. that is where the actual connections between souls can be found. waving a generalization at another person is just too easy … like social chit chat … it will keep going on and on and on with no anchor like a ship lost as sea. i do believe that is consistent with what you quoted RS saying in this thought.
Specifics builds intimacy … but not necessarily understanding, or rapport. Rapport is based on harmonized vibrations of thought, and understanding is based on shared beliefs.
And #love is most often felt when all 3 come at once.
I realize you folks are having fun with #hashit but if you stand back a bit & look it doesn’f read very well – something similar to what someone complained about with the old $smileys
#soundslike an #orgy
Well, I disagree, not to #rwg, but simply because I have probably been doing this longer, with more people, and now see the new, evolving, multi-dimensional, language that #hashtag’s create. When you first see it, it’s more like seeing a new foreign language and doesn’t read well … but when you learn to read it more like a tesseract, then the depth of the new language starts popping out at you and you wonder at how so much information can now be packed into such a small space of just one paragraph!
specifics build intimacy, it is true …. and proves it … concepts build it too and harmonize. frequently it is easier to start with general concepts … actual examples and specifics are harder … but that is where we touch which is the intamacy me thinks creates a deapth of real consciousness.
where deep spiritual matters are our context, this is even more the case than the easy geography of our lives. i could tell a true story of where i first discovered the easy waving of generalities and how it can easily harmonize a group of like minded people. but i’ve told it before, … anywy it is available upon request.
thing is, ever term in our language is a #hashtag. the only real difference is that now poeple are encouraged to #MakeShitUp … which, i agree with Navigator is a great part of where it is at
if every word is a #hashturd then why put a #poundsign #in #front #of #them ?
- For the needs of the computer, so it can be identified and hyperlinked … all words were hyperlinked in CyberMind(tm) … but here that is not very efficient.
- So that humans can visually parse the new #hashwords as discrete symbols … much like #GW said that the next written language would be symbols, and he thought maybe like Chinese, but it turns out it is a new kind of symbol made up of multiple squished words preceded with
and it is not very effecient here either … must needs an entire search of the database for each delve ← just saying …. fun though, good implementation
Very soon #hashtag’s will be indexed and super fast. Finished massaging the tagging table and converting all the SQL queries already. Now just a little magic on the saves and it’s done.
so is there going to be a centralized pc guy who determines which #hashtags can be used or can anyone update the table or is it dynamic ? What are the rules on what a #hashtag looks like? I noticed that #M$M did not work as one.
i don’t think it is being done with a table … rather by a global search now using an index.
No, it is a table, the same old tagging table in fact. There is no way to create an index in SQL without a table column to do it on.
Standard rules for hash tags, as can be seen at the below link, except that we also exclude dashes and underscores for the same reason they discourage them. Otherwise the same.
that is a surprise. i guess i’ll have to go look at the tagging table.
Conversation forked to thought 21500
- Thought Thought, Feeling, and Will with 378 viewings related by tag "RS".
- Thought The perception of decay with 318 viewings related by tag "RS".
- Thought There is no intrinsic meaning in signs. with 288 viewings related by tag "language".
- Thought Love - Lying with 281 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Inquiry: The nature of an individual to a group. with 266 viewings related by tag "RS".
- Thought Rudolf Steiner speaks of the CycleOfDoing with 235 viewings related by tag "RS".
- Thought Calling Wolf with 197 viewings related by tag "MakeShitUp".
- Thought Teasing out the "will" with 188 viewings related by tag "gw".
- Thought Enforcement enacted. with 186 viewings related by tag "MakeShitUp".
- Thought about: Megaphone vs Free Speech vs Political Correctness - comment 73418 - comment 73462 with 177 viewings related by tag "GW".
- Thought Fake News or Advertisement - PC Meme Spreading & Political Correctness with 173 viewings related by tag "language".
- Thought Negative Feedback with 166 viewings related by tag "rwg".
- Thought Zen & the Art of the Right-Wrong Game with 158 viewings related by tag "rwg".
- Thought Encountering Edges with 153 viewings related by tag "gw".
- Thought Socretes Cafe Tuesday April 18 2017 with 138 viewings related by tag "RWG".
- Thought [title (21932)] with 137 viewings related by tag "RWG".
- Thought Politics is the Art of making the possible happen ... with 131 viewings related by tag "RWG".
- Thought Glossary with 116 viewings related by tag "hashtag".
- Thought Conversation on hash tags? with 111 viewings related by tag "hashtag".
- Thought I banished evil! with 110 viewings related by tag "hashtag".
- Thought Wow! Words have meanings to others too! with 105 viewings related by tag "hashtag".
- Thought Rudolph Steiner with 104 viewings related by tag "rs".
- Thought Why my trains of thought break ... with 104 viewings related by tag "hashtags".
- Thought about: Important Things to Know & Do with 102 viewings related by tag "GW".
- Thought about: Unhacking Wars - comment 67183 with 68 viewings related by tag "rs".
- Thought A deeper understanding of American intelligence via the PDB with 66 viewings related by tag "MakeShitUp".
- Thought The Oath of Truth with 63 viewings related by tag "GW".
- Thought The C.F.R. Channel with 59 viewings related by tag "GW".
- Thought Thinking in the Public River with 58 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Think a thing in and of itself with 58 viewings related by tag "RS".
- Thought about: What Seth voted for in politics - comment 64975 with 57 viewings related by tag "RWG".
- Thought #MadeUpShit #MakeUpShit with 53 viewings related by tag "MakeShitUp".
- Thought Conversation Rooms and Tag Clouds with 44 viewings related by tag "hashtag".
- Thought Humanity from the Anthroposophical Point of View with 44 viewings related by tag "rs".
- Thought Clarifying how hashtag’s are defined with 41 viewings related by tag "hashtag".
- Thought Being on Stage in the Foreground with 38 viewings related by tag "rwg".
- Thought The trick is to enjoy the prick with 38 viewings related by tag "RWG".
- Thought about: C.F. Russell - Wikipedia with 37 viewings related by tag "GW".
- Thought Communication with 31 viewings related by tag "RWG".
- Thought The Objective World vs The Occurring World with 31 viewings related by tag "language".
- Thought Oath of Truth with 30 viewings related by tag "of".
- Thought about: The Medium is the Message - comment 74259 with 30 viewings related by tag "GW".
- Thought What informs hearing truth? with 30 viewings related by tag "MakeShitUp".
- Thought What is the fear of losing control? with 30 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought I am what i do with 28 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought #Field with 26 viewings related by tag "NLP".
- Thought about: I like Words - I respect words - I love words with 25 viewings related by tag "language".
- Thought Re keeping things hidden ... with 23 viewings related by tag "GW".
- Thought Infinite Nothing NOW with 23 viewings related by tag "rwg".
- Thought I like Words - I respect words - I love words with 22 viewings related by tag "language".