Guest Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 (edited) Metaphysical arrogance = ignorance Yes all arogance = ignorance There is a difference though with what is viewed as arrogance and the arrogant perspective. Sometimes a person who suggests a different way of seeing is seen as attacking when they are just suggesting a different way of seeing. The alternate view is feared because of the discomfort it brings, people dont like their underlying assumptions being exposed. When people present a metaphysical viewpoint to those with underlying assumptions that their world view is the only factual way of seeing, they are often seen as either trouble makers, arrogant or dangerous - this is because those who have never looked into their underlying assumptions concerning reality think that they will be torn assunder by such questioning (go insane for instance). Still the person with the metaphysical point of view wasnt being arrogant they were just speaking out of the unsaid boundaries of taboo. They are adventurers driven to find truths to such an extent they face the danger of tearing down their own sense of identity but then they find they come through that and its pretty wonderful what they find. Discussing other ideas is reasoning. Byron said "Those who will not reason, are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves." If we do not question underlying assumptions in our society, we are slaves. Edited February 24, 2012 by Encounter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 They can teach us that nothing in this world is as we have been taught. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 (edited) Wonderful answer! (the smilie is saying bravo) Edited February 24, 2012 by Encounter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehead74 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 (edited) Bonehead I guess you are saying you feel you are hitting your head against a pole or brick wall here, but from an Aussie point of view it looks like your just doing normal rugby training. Edited February 24, 2012 by Encounter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
See-Te-Cah NC Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Unless we're going to try to adapt our lives to that of a BF there's nothing that they can teach us. Maybe some medical benefits can be extracted from them via DNA or something of that sort? Not trying to be ugly or anything, just putting it out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehead74 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Bonehead I guess you are saying you feel you are hitting your head against a pole or brick wall here, but from an Aussie point of view it looks like your just doing normal rugby training. That's why it's hard not to like you, Encounter! We can certainly disagree, but unlike many, you remain civil and respectful. I award you a +1. Back to the discussion: How do you account for the people who have weighed both sides and honestly and objectively come down on the other side? Or someone like myself, who believes that the classical Cartesian dualism worldview (which separates absolutely mind or spirit from matter) presents a false dichotomy? Do you admit the existence of any absolutes? P.S. I actually am a rugby player, a 7-man/flanker usually, so I can appreciate your sentiment that much better! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JiggyPotamus Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Like others have mentioned, we have to learn everything we can about them. The more we know, the better for them, as their actions will not be misinterpreted as often, and result in some avoidable mishap...for us or the creature. I don't buy the whole "bigfoot is an equal" junk, simply because we ARE more advanced and more intelligent than they are. That doesn't mean we have to dominate them however. Like I have been peddling for some time now, I will say this: Bigfoot being scientifically discovered is a GOOD thing for them, and not a death sentence like others seem to think. This is why I get angry at people who withhold information that could finally make the big moment happen, but they don't, and they are unknowingly setting the bigfoot up for failure in the future. Every single time we cut down a section of forest to make room for a sub-division or other buildings, we are eliminating habitat that the bigfoot could possibly utilize. This will force them further into the wilderness, where trees are being logged by the ton, eliminating even more of their habitat. Of course there is enough forest for them to live in, even if they must retreat. But, not all forests are equal in terms of suitable habitat for a bigfoot, and the large influx of bigfoot from opposing ends of the forests is going to cause their density to swell dramatically, followed by a mass die-off due to competition for food sources. And I suspect bigfoot will kill each other over food. People seem to think that humans are domesticated because we live in societies and have big cities and fast food, but if all that collapsed, humans would have only one thing on their mind: survival. And this would be obtained no matter WHAT one has to do. I imagine bigfoot are the same way. So if their population density increases, they are likely to start being seen more in populated areas, as they are hungry and looking for food. This whole scenario isn't likely to happen in the Pacific Northwest as soon as it will in other places; smaller states that don't have all that much unpopulated acreage. So proving they exist is a must if we wish to preserve their population density, among preserving other things that are equally important. So to answer your question, what can bigfoot teach us...Bigfoot will teach MANY that they have been close-minded and should feel ashamed. Therefore bigfoot could possibly teach humans to trust one another more. As far as direct interaction and some form of communication, if this were possible, bigfoot may be able to show us some cool wilderness survival skills, lol, which may not be possible for us to utilize due to the extreme difference in characteristics. I think all in all, bigfoot will teach us that they are worth preserving. And we must save as much of their territory as possible, especially in sparsely-forested states and regions. Failure to do this will eventually have a dramatic impact on the creature's ability to survive. How long can we keep doing what we are doing without severely impacting the bigfoot population? I'm sure we are impacting them on some level, but I don't know how much longer we can continue on the same course without hurting them badly...it could be 5 years, or 20. But why wait for that many years when we should be proactive right now? This is why proving their existence is extremely important at this point in time. And yes, I know there is much speculation in this post, so I don't need anyone to call me out on it, lol. I base my analyses on what I believe to be the current status of the bigfoot population, as well as all other aspects of bigfoot life. I may not be correct all that much, but one day we will know with some degree of certainty, and then we can argue facts. So although I present some of these things as fact, they are really still just opinions, some of them more educated than others. Well, carry on!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 (edited) I think bigfoot could teach us many things: self reliance, respect both for each other and for the world, family values, along with skills either long lost or never posessed. The real question is will they teach us, or more to the point will we seek to be taught. If the teacher doesn't have a student or conversely, if the would be student can't find a teacher, no learning will take place. The potential is there, I guess time will tell. Edited February 24, 2012 by John T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 I think we need to teach them to be Super Bad Trunk Monkeys. They can teach us how to not waste rotton meat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 I am of the same mind as Encounter. We've learned so much from all the creatures of this planet as people. It's amazing to see how many of us have forgotten it. What we can learn from BF is limitless, we can learn from them the same way our ancestors learned from watching a bird sore through the sky. That's just the tip of the ice berg. To say we can learn nothing from a bear is being plain foolish in my opinion. Every animal on this planet has it's importance from the smallest insect to the largest mammal, every man/animal has it's worth. I personally believe BF could teach us how to better adapt to its habitat, as these High altitude mountainous forest regions are some of the most gruelling and treacherous on the planet, if we ever got a chance to observe them. I do think it is unfair to say that discovering bigfoot would mean that nothing in this world is as we are taught. I know we've gotten a lot wrong, but i also know we've gotten a lot right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peter O. Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 in great shape--he's got it made! Adapted to cutover lands, lives a good rugged existence.... He's got no need for wages, lives off the fat of the land, and pays no taxes!" That pretty much sums up the allure of the "wild man" if you ask me. Peace, Peter To shamelessly quote myself, BF could teach us to come to terms with our tribal, wild self. Anti-evolutionists in Kansas won't like his message. Jung would, though. That is, if that darn DNA study every comes out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehead74 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 (edited) How is it that you know what bigfoot's message is, or that they even have a message? Could it be you are projecting a bit? Edited February 24, 2012 by Bonehead74 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Back to the discussion: How do you account for the people who have weighed both sides and honestly and objectively come down on the other side? Or someone like myself, who believes that the classical Cartesian dualism worldview (which separates absolutely mind or spirit from matter) presents a false dichotomy? Do you admit the existence of any absolutes? Im one of those who has just gone out into nature to find answers. I get answers and then later find out they are this philosophy or that philosophy. When I was very young I came into a philosophy that I later learnt was close to Descartes Cartesian philosophy, then I went through a stage I later found out was apparently close to Taoist beliefs, then I went through something I found was close to what people now call shamanism, (new druidry concepts are close), all in all I came across these ideas by just asking questions within and didnt read much. I did then study philosophy and music at uni but was too busy thinking to actually read anyone (oddly the philosophy department thought I must have read very widely but I just guessed what Neitzche might say and in logic I actually proved the unicorn must exist and scored one of the few high distinctions given by the logic lecturer a well regarded man in philosophy). So when I answer you about what I believe I just underline nothing has just been fed to me nor would i ever stop ask questions. When you ask how I deal wtih those who have looked fully and honestly at both sides and come out the other side, well firstly I am heartened to know others do this (because its quite a full on thing to tear apart your root assumtions to try to honestly see from another way) - but secondly I am not sure you are aware of the sides of view we are speaking about here. I am coming from a viewpoint you may not know. In this viewpoint everything is consciousness, there is no separate thing, and there certainly is no separate thing which is physical. Linear time is in this viewpoint, a means of experience but there is no time as such and where there is a temporal experience the truth of it is closer to open time. In this viewpoint there is meaning everywhere, everything is interrelated and all beings are part of the other though at the same time unique. That part you might call dualism but its not perhaps the same as dualism. In this viewpoint everything that is, is sentient, including every cell in your body. Physicality is just form, conciousness experiences through form but is not bound by any one form and further is part of all form and non form. Id go on but as you know such discussion seems insane. Absolutes - well there are some absolutes but then they are expressed in infinite ways. The ultimate absolute is love - love is unlimited and expressed in infinite ways, and this is also infinite creation. Now I know religous wording is not generally allowed here but just to say for those who would use the word, God, then each conciousness is unique but all part of God and each consciousness is a face of God. You see at some point while always getting answers in my own way ( a sort of socratic method I didnt know was that until some twenty years after I first started utilising it) I came to an empasse and then ran into a very scary guy in a very scary place when hiking who told me about a book I should read. I told him so far anything I had read was not deep enough, but he insisted this would be different. When I got back to Sydney I went to my usual vegan health food store for food (being a vegan in the army by the way is a true test of moral fortitude) and while they never had second hand books someone had recently come in and asked them to sell a second hand book which happened to be the one this scary guy told me about. I had to buy it. The views in it began to answer very very deep questions. So if I could explain my world view it might be close, though still unique, to the multidimensional philosophy in the Seth books coauthored with Jane Roberts and Robert Butts. If you get a hold of "Seth Speaks" and you can get into it, you wont look back. Still this does not fully encompass my world view, perhaps people like Tich Naht Hahn, indigenous beliefs etc would also represent my perspective to an extent. So, Im sure I have answered your question more than you desired ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the parkie Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Hi Can I ask what you specifically learnt from a blade of grass? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts