How not to focus

About: how to see an elephant with multi-person binocular vision.

...

This is a collection of Mark changing the topic to Bozo instead of focusing on the topic at hand.

Comments

Seth says

Einai 2014-03-12 12:21:41 17160

O, well my group has better material to work with.

I guess I will hang out there for a while. I just have to refrain from pushing the news button &/or responding to any messages affixed to mine there. Can always delete the latter if it invades my mental space.
Adios
Good Luck

well, yes of course, I can always isolate myself ... and make the wall between my insides and my outsides just as very solid as I thinks is necessary to preserve the stories I tell myself.

hmmm ... seem like i remember you even telling me that yourself. Didn't you?

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-03-12 02:16:25 17160

Einai 2014-03-12 00:01:06 17160

This is Seth going wiggy in the RWG & failure to focus .

yep this is good place to put your examples like that one there.

i guess you know your totally predictable. get close to understanding my view and you must for some ungodly reason start accusing me of shit. then act like it was me doing the rwg ... lol.

anyway, expect those to be transferred here. they distract from the topics at hand.

The parable of the blind men & the Elephant is hardly new or origingal see: the Wikipedia.

And so these men of Hindustan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right
And all were in the wrong.

Seth says

Einai 2014-03-11 15:56:23 17158

seth 2014-03-11 15:04:55 17158

Einai 2014-03-11 13:40:31 17158

seth 2014-03-11 13:00:46 17158

Einai 2014-03-11 11:37:59 17158

seth 2014-03-11 09:46:00 17158

Einai 2014-03-11 08:56:57 17158

seth 2014-03-11 08:52:32 17158

Einai 2014-03-11 08:49:13 17158

show the new thing on the Ven diagram not just use the words or your equation.

er, i did.

I see nothing strange or remarkable - what are you getting at? It depends upon where you focus when you say not X, eh?

well [I] thought you were focusing on not peanut butter. bear in mind that when we think, when we draw distinctions, we are not in a state of complete clarity and absolute knowing. presuming we are is to be dishonest.

Such is your strawman. When I make a distinction for myself I know what I am pointing at.

... wow

... an infallible mind. Such a thing to behold! I guess you haven't ever had the experience of thinking something is different and then after careful attention finding out it was the same ... or visa versa. I wonder, do you ever want to leave yourself open to that possibility ... or not ?

Read carefully what I wrote. When I make a distinction I separate something out of my perceptive world (mind, body & spirit) from the background noise (the whole universe). Whether or not it corresponds to anything I say or you say has nothing to do with being right or wrong or examining it from different perspectives. I make something distinct for myself. Perhaps this one will help repeating, perhaps a bit clearer, the sequence of encounter in 3976 .

Well of course, quite so, as to the bolded sentence. Nor did i suggest anything different.

Now think where do we use this "not not" analysis? Well it is used after the fact to go beyond what is given by your personal experience. And that is the very place that we need to realize that, even thought we made the distinction ourselves quite honestly, to go beyond that experience we should perhaps realize that not (not peanut butter) is not necessarily peanut butter.

<<<===>>>

but maybe just BØZØ ≈ BØ≠Ø
or argumentativeness & not helpful for anything on my side of your walled garden. Glad you ignored this & went right on repeating SOS. Kinda helps put things in perspective when I found this on tumblr:

source: ... No." And "Who the fuck cares?" A lot.
So many super special snow flakes it’s a turd blizzard.

...

Mark de LA says

[see if you can: wikipedia] - still you are just argumentative & hardly enlightening here either in spite of leaving 17158 behind.

See if you can be honest & not shift context when you talk about double negatives. or such appearing in boolean algebra or predicate calculus.

Mark de LA says

Seth says

Einai 2014-03-12 00:01:06 17160

This is Seth going wiggy in the RWG & failure to focus .

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-03-12 10:13:08 17160

Einai 2014-03-12 09:49:16 17160

Serving up the same meal multiple times doesn't make it taste any better. So what?

There are many different points of view, eh?
So what. You think you got them all?
Good for you!
Most probably you don't have them all? Look again.
Think all of yours are correct?
Maybe take another look, eh?
Accuse me of missing one?
Good for you, I probably do & will again, eh?
Just because I missed one, if I did, does that mean that the rest of mine are invalid?
Good luck with that argument!
In the net of it all this item is more like rwg than helpful ontology.
If one has to give up the already-always listening to know what you are talking about that may be good, eh? Maybe you should do the same to hear that one's objections to your speaking.
OTOH

sorry i don't really care about any of that. Fyi i did not even parse it very deeply ... would be too painful for me ... sorry. If there was anything in it that was really important to you, could you introduce it to me differently?

Seth says

Einai 2014-03-12 09:52:33 17160

seth 2014-03-12 09:38:37 17160

source: mark
The parable of the blind men & the Elephant is hardly new or origingal see: the Wikipedia.

Yep this is an old parable and one of my favorite

.

Strangely enough, adding the idea that people frequently change their focus to each other rather than the elephant, was my extension of the parable. At least i have never heard anybody else do it.

Come on now, give me a bit of credit where it is actually due, eh?

Maybe enjoy the credit.
How does this play into your constant objections like when you say "this is not about Bozo" , eh?

yeah a funny one indeed

.

Did you realize that i never noted my specific credit for the extension of the parable until you made credit for the parable part of the topic (see your words bolded above)?

So here we have a case where you point at me, instead of the elephant, and then when i respond to that, you accuse me of talking about Bozo. Yeah, funny little thingey went on there, eh?

Incidentally i never did think that extension was any big deal ... i did know it was mine ... and thought it might be useful to metaphorically illustrate what i was intending to say.

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-03-12 10:23:43 17160

Einai 2014-03-12 10:15:17 17160

seth 2014-03-12 10:13:08 17160

Einai 2014-03-12 09:49:16 17160

Serving up the same meal multiple times doesn't make it taste any better. So what?

Nope - you are too good an example of what you are preaching about - you would never listen to it as you just proved.

but isn't that response just this reflection phenomenon going on here? ... you seeing your own bad behavior as comming from outside of yourself ? ... you projecting your own bad behavior on me?

But, please, like i asked, if there was really something specifically there that was important, could you re-intruduce it objectively? I do not care about it said the way you said it.

Nope - you are too good an example of what you are preaching about - you would never listen to it as you just proved.

I got the elephant thingy in a seminar over 20 years ago & the reflection thingy decades ago (somewhere near the Golden Rule epiphany) . I lost interest a long time ago on this post as it continues the flavor of 4413 even with a glass of wine

Enjoy!
Adios!

Seth says

Einai 2014-03-12 07:30:40 17160

This metaphor needs to be rewritten as deaf man - one who can't hear. The signs are there but he is only reading one of them - perhaps the one on his own trunk.

yep we can extend this metaphor all over the place. maybe even write a whole opus just about it.