PDA

View Full Version : The relationship between the dual nature of man.


Prince Rai
11-24-2008, 09:18 AM
Allow me to begin my brief introduction of this theme by showing you the following picture:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y18/princerai/yin-yang.jpg


What we clearly see is the famous Yin-Yang circle of duality where two forces are opposite each other but also intertwine.

This will also be the benchmark theorem that I will use to explain my take on Man and his own inner relationship.


You see, for "good" to exist we require a certain "bad" benchmark so that we can describe the "good" that we want to see.

This dual nature of things is vital for our universe. Without light, there is no "darkness" as we know it, because if there was no light, we would assume darkness to be just a standard thing that always existed and we would pay no attention to it, we would think "vision" does not exist and that we were all born blind.

What I am getting at here is that Humans exhibit similar dual relationships within ourselves.

We strive hard to be "good" people, but we must also understand the philosophy that we ARE Yin Yang circles where there is an opposite force inside us that intertwines with our desire to be good.

In order for us to be "good" permanently, ought we allow ourselves to be "bad" at times, in order to get a better picture of how "good" we can become?


I hope the concept I brought forward can be grasped by the way I explained myself, if there is some confusion please let me know and I will try and explain further. My initial aim was not to write an essay, but a paragraph to start something.

David Columbine
11-24-2008, 09:34 AM
I totally agree with the theory of duality, the universe consits of twos mathmatically and metaphysically this is proved time and time again.
The easiest way to analyze the universe is via mathematical physics, the reason everything consits of twos is simple its the only way to stabilize a balanced equation.
By this i mean when one forumlates a divisonary equation the main aim is to get balanced results in order to gain an understanding of the question.

It is much the same with the universe, all matter is arranged in twos this is the universes way of balancing out the equation.

Prince Rai
11-24-2008, 10:48 AM
Very true, the fundamental building blocks of our universe rests upon duality. Wave particle duality is an example of how intricate duality is when it comes to the physical nature and hints at the metaphysical spectrum that comes alight out of this phenomenon.

I like the relationship between ourselves and the universe and how we can learn more about ourselves by understanding the fundamental laws of nature.

Peace

THE MASON
11-24-2008, 11:20 AM
i agree Rai

if that battle of good and bad isnt going on inside mentally and spiritually then how would we know which is which.

if we are always good, then we will never know what bad is and have nothing to contrast it too. Similarly with if we commit act deemed bad. life is based on cycles and this is one that cycles the morales we develop. if you constently are doing wrong then you may develop the sense, what your doing isnt bad because you never experienced good

David Columbine
11-24-2008, 11:58 AM
Very true, the fundamental building blocks of our universe rests upon duality. Wave particle duality is an example of how intricate duality is when it comes to the physical nature and hints at the metaphysical spectrum that comes alight out of this phenomenon.

I like the relationship between ourselves and the universe and how we can learn more about ourselves by understanding the fundamental laws of nature.

Peace

Correct, nature is the only track to take if humans want to develop a understanding of our existense and purpose based on fact not superstition.

As i think of humans in a sense of their place in the natrual order thats where i come to a dilemma. Every creature on earth has an almost symbiotic relationship with one other, in order for one species to survive it must depend on another and so on and so forth.

Humans however have a totally different relationship with nature, we are not needed as a vital piece in this bilogical jigsaw, if we were removed the jigsaw would remain somewhat unaffected, it would proberly cause the earth to flourish actually.
Animals depend on each other to survive, wheras humans care only about there survival, the fate of the earth is not on our agenda most of the time, hence the reason we commit such barbaric attrocities upon nature.

Its a tough one.

dezmond
11-24-2008, 12:26 PM
True..

If there was no Devil God would be out of a job....

Let the best man win....

But I would saw that you dont necessarily need to do bad yourself in order to see the good..

You could just observe & learn from the overwhelming-literaly-amount of people doin bad all around you...

Peace.

Prince Rai
11-24-2008, 02:25 PM
True..

If there was no Devil God would be out of a job....

Let the best man win....

But I would saw that you dont necessarily need to do bad yourself in order to see the good..

You could just observe & learn from the overwhelming-literaly-amount of people doin bad all around you...

Peace.

I agree, we do learn a lot of other people's mistakes and bad deeds. We are also exposed to the perception of "good" with the Laws that govern our everyday lives.

My main point was directed towards the idea that we ARE allowed to make mistakes, not meant to be a cliche, but we are allowed to make them and from those mistakes correct ourselves.

WARPATH
11-24-2008, 02:58 PM
I have to disagree with this concept, somewhat.

The idea that we have this dual nature, is not nature at all but instead, the duality stems from how we are nurtured from birth.

Take a baby for instance, there is nothing evil about a baby. A baby is nature in human form.

It's easy for children to pick up on bad behavior. But nothing children do is really considered evil. It's when they get older where- fighting, stealing, lying, can get them in trouble. They pick these things up from their up bringing. If their parents are not there to set an example, they will make their choices based on previous experience and whatever other "environmental stresses" they have on them at that moment.

Benchmarks are in the eyes of each individual. Killing in war is an example. Killing another example for political reasons, say securing a water source in another country. Some would say fighting for such a reason is evil because you are taking from other people. However some would argue that securing the nations resources helps save more people in a broader sense. Either way the benchmark depends on the individuals nurturing.

I believe Nature vs. Nurture is the equation to balance. Can you overcome learned behavior?

Mathematically speaking.

Nature = Nature (equation balanced)

Nature =/= Nurture (unbalanced)

It's how we are nurtured that impacts nature. We balance our nature with how we are nurtured.

David Columbine
11-24-2008, 03:31 PM
The idea that we have this dual nature, is not nature at all but instead, the duality stems from how we are nurtured from birth.

Take a baby for instance, there is nothing evil about a baby. A baby is nature in human form.

It's easy for children to pick up on bad behavior. But nothing children do is really considered evil. It's when they get older where- fighting, stealing, lying, can get them in trouble. They pick these things up from their up bringing. If their parents are not there to set an example, they will make their choices based on previous experience and whatever other "environmental stresses" they have on them at that moment.

Benchmarks are in the eyes of each individual. Killing in war is an example. Killing another example for political reasons, say securing a water source in another country. Some would say fighting for such a reason is evil because you are taking from other people. However some would argue that securing the nations resources helps save more people in a broader sense. Either way the benchmark depends on the individuals nurturing.

I believe Nature vs. Nurture is the equation to balance. Can you overcome learned behavior?

Mathematically speaking.

Nature = Nature (equation balanced)

Nature =/= Nurture (unbalanced)

It's how we are nurtured that impacts nature. We balance our nature with how we are nurtured.

The application of duality is not restricted to humans, emotions and choices are immaterial they have no substance they are merely chemical reactions and responses in the brain, purely biological.

Duality is necessary for balance, take the scales of justice for example the left scale might
outweigh the other but the right one will outweigh the left at some point, meaning they come in two but take turns in balancing the scales out.

Compere the universe to the scales of justice, every action has a repercussion every added weight will bring the other higher or lower this is a basic introduction to the theory of duality.

Cause = effect
Choice = action

Prince Rai
11-24-2008, 05:04 PM
I have to disagree with this concept, somewhat.

The idea that we have this dual nature, is not nature at all but instead, the duality stems from how we are nurtured from birth.

Take a baby for instance, there is nothing evil about a baby. A baby is nature in human form.

It's easy for children to pick up on bad behavior. But nothing children do is really considered evil. It's when they get older where- fighting, stealing, lying, can get them in trouble. They pick these things up from their up bringing. If their parents are not there to set an example, they will make their choices based on previous experience and whatever other "environmental stresses" they have on them at that moment.

Benchmarks are in the eyes of each individual. Killing in war is an example. Killing another example for political reasons, say securing a water source in another country. Some would say fighting for such a reason is evil because you are taking from other people. However some would argue that securing the nations resources helps save more people in a broader sense. Either way the benchmark depends on the individuals nurturing.

I believe Nature vs. Nurture is the equation to balance. Can you overcome learned behavior?

Mathematically speaking.

Nature = Nature (equation balanced)

Nature =/= Nurture (unbalanced)

It's how we are nurtured that impacts nature. We balance our nature with how we are nurtured.

i see your point and absolutely agree. children are born free of sin.

i also agree with david here whereby my notion of duality expands to much greater bounds than you had interpreted me saying.


You see, I can explain my duality in the sense that for a baby to have been born in the first place, the coming of two opposites had to occur and intertwine

man+woman=sexual relationship (effect is to have a child)

here the theory addressed the underlining "chance" of the "being" in nature.

once a child is conceived, the possibilities in life determine the outcome of that child.

duality in this aspect plays a vital role in the development of that child.

outside factors affect the inside factors of the child/
inside factors affect the outside factors of the child.

diggy
11-24-2008, 07:53 PM
I have a problem with the "in order to be good we must allow ourselves to be bad".

Good and bad are subjective, abstract terms. What is good for one maybe considered bad for another.

I believe we have different parts of ourselves which can express themselves in different ways if we allow it to (emotions and intelligence, etc.), but just cause we have certain emotions or thoughts does not make them bad.

If we use them in the right way they are useful for us and others. It does not have to be a struggle.

We also do not have to act on all thoughts and feelings. The emotions and impulses might be the ammo, but the ability to make choices is the trigger that we don't always have to pull.

Putting things in their proper place and using them the right way (internally speaking) would make things work better, I guess.

Face of the Golden Falcon
11-25-2008, 04:26 AM
P.E.A.C.E and Blessings...

I agree with Diggy with the "in order to be good we must allow ourselves to be bad" thing but not because they are subjective terms. I do agree that for the majority of people good and evil or right and wrong are subjective and are based on a personal point of view, but this is because for the majority of people the morality faculty within their spirit is still dormant. This faculty allows one to intuitively understand the underlying factors of a situation or event that defines whether it is right or wrong.

Right and wrong in this case is not based on our own point of view, which in our spiritual immature society means on our own feelings, emotions and desires. Instead, true right and wrong is that which is accordance with universal law (the Tao, Maat in Kamitic spiritual science, also what is known as the great balance) and that which is in accordance with our animalistic, selfish desires, respectively.

What this means is, that in the universe, balance (yin and yang, tefnut and shu) has nothing to do with a balance between good and evil, rather good is balance, evil is that which is out of balance. This is easily observed as nothing in nature can be considered evil. Without human interaction the universe is balanced perfectly, harmoniously in a great system of interaction and inter-relationships. There is creation and destruction but both occur in harmony with the parts and the whole.

Man on the other hand is the only being that is capable of evil. That is, when we act through the lower mind and the lower parts of the spirit, we ultimately will act, on a general basis, out of our own desires regardless of how they effect the parts and whole. When, however, the balance of Yin and Yang occurs within us (left and right hemispheres of the brain, upper and lower spirit etc.) and within our society (Man and woman, balance of science, religion, economics, education etc. as parts of a whole ie. Life!) we will find ourselves acting in accordance with Universal Law (Tao, Maat, Balance).

All with in ALL, my understanding is that the balance of Yin and Yang in our lives is not the balance of good and evil, rather it is the absence of evil (inbalance).

SHEM HETEP

David Columbine
11-25-2008, 04:42 AM
The words good and bad should not be used in this conversation because they are irrelevant as people have said they are subjective and therefore obselete in terms of applying the terms to a wider spectrum of theory.
What matters is that one thing will effect the other, universal cause and effect whether you percieve it as bad or good makes no difference, one does make a difference is that the universe consists of a pivot the actions of sentinent matter balance out this pivot.

What i find hard to grasp is the nature of man in relationship to universal balance, i understand mans purpose is to redo what has been done but i find that our deconstruction of stabillity and our disregard for balance will only lead to a path of self-destruction and if that is the purpose of man to unbalance the earth to the point of nothing i wonder what the grand purpose of it all is.

Planets need to grow then be consumed then destroyed much the same with stars, the cosmic dust collectivly gives birth to new planets and stars, the reason why we need organic lifeforms to do this instead of energy and dark matter is the big question.

Face of the Golden Falcon
11-25-2008, 05:04 AM
P.E.A.C.E and Blessings David 87...

...In my last post I spoke of a faculty within man that is able to intuit the underlying factors of a situation or event or action to know whether it is good or evil, or if we are disregarding those words, in accordance with balance or out of balance. This is the key to morality. It enables us to perceive the situation, event or action directly through the eyes, so to speak, of Universal Law. Thoughts?

Regarding the purpose of man it is not to unbalance. We have strayed from our purpose.

The answer to the big question is in the level of consciousness that is able to come into the world. Organic lifeforms allow for a more vast level of experience and interaction with all.

SHEM HETEP

WARPATH
11-25-2008, 11:12 AM
The application of duality is not restricted to humans, emotions and choices are immaterial they have no substance they are merely chemical reactions and responses in the brain, purely biological.

Duality is necessary for balance, take the scales of justice for example the left scale might
outweigh the other but the right one will outweigh the left at some point, meaning they come in two but take turns in balancing the scales out.

Compere the universe to the scales of justice, every action has a repercussion every added weight will bring the other higher or lower this is a basic introduction to the theory of duality.

Cause = effect
Choice = action

But emotions and choices do have substance, in the sense that they are chemical reactions.

When you mix certain chemicals together, in certain amounts, they can cause fire, explosions, or some other reaction.

A small chemical reaction in the brain effects others and their chemistry as they react with you.

In humans that leads to fighting, broken families...etc.

Again the example is nature vs. nurture. How you carry yourself effect those around you. Depending on how those around you are raised will decide how their brain reacts to you.

What i find hard to grasp is the nature of man in relationship to universal balance, i understand mans purpose is to redo what has been done but i find that our deconstruction of stabillity and our disregard for balance will only lead to a path of self-destruction and if that is the purpose of man to unbalance the earth to the point of nothing i wonder what the grand purpose of it all is.

Planets need to grow then be consumed then destroyed much the same with stars, the cosmic dust collectivly gives birth to new planets and stars, the reason why we need organic lifeforms to do this instead of energy and dark matter is the big question.

Nature has and always will take care of it's self, the question is how long will nature take care of us?

David Columbine
11-25-2008, 12:39 PM
But emotions and choices do have substance, in the sense that they are chemical reactions.

When you mix certain chemicals together, in certain amounts, they can cause fire, explosions, or some other reaction.

A small chemical reaction in the brain effects others and their chemistry as they react with you.

In humans that leads to fighting, broken families...etc.

Again the example is nature vs. nurture. How you carry yourself effect those around you. Depending on how those around you are raised will decide how their brain reacts to you.




Nature has and always will take care of it's self, the question is how long will nature take care of us?

When i say substance i am talking in terms of physical matter, chemical reactions in the brain are not seen and if they could be they would be too small for the naked eye to see, i am not talking in riddles or spiritualist terms when i write i prefer to base my beleifs on science ,fact and reason.

Chemical reactions outside of the brain are a different topic entirely.

Wouldent you say nuture is a part of nature?

Nature is a living organism effected by its enviroment much like an indivdual creature is, humans cause such damage that nature will initiate a self defense mechanism much like it did with the dinosaurs, its the earths way of ridding the earth of threats against its survival.

Taking in terms of spirituality i would say if one were to believe in a god, the earth would be the most obvious choice.

Prince Rai
11-25-2008, 01:03 PM
Peace to the Build.

I see the point that "to be good, we allow ourselves evil" is quite stretched and I need to put it into context a little more.

Nature is a place where two opposite forces play with each other to create what we want to perceive as "balance".

It can be concluded that human balance is to be found therein where we find "good", and maintaining "good" is a priority we set by trying to eliminate "evil" or "bad".

Now, murder is an evil, and an evil we cannot afford to commit in order to achieve blessing of the opposite "good".

What we must however appreciate is that we make "mistakes" and we must not beat ourselves up on that. We are naturally prone to make mistakes and whether they are "bad" or not depends on interpretation (personal). Regardless however of what we interpret in single cases, we submit that some degree of mistakes are still made, and they govern our interpretation of our own "good".

Nature works like that, "evil" is not always the direct opposite to good, "bad" may be more convenient for these matters.

WARPATH
11-25-2008, 01:19 PM
When i say substance i am talking in terms of physical matter, chemical reactions in the brain are not seen and if they could be they would be too small for the naked eye to see, i am not talking in riddles or spiritualist terms when i write i prefer to base my beleifs on science ,fact and reason.

Chemical reactions outside of the brain are a different topic entirely.

Wouldent you say nuture is a part of nature?

Nature is a living organism effected by its enviroment much like an indivdual creature is, humans cause such damage that nature will initiate a self defense mechanism much like it did with the dinosaurs, its the earths way of ridding the earth of threats against its survival.

Taking in terms of spirituality i would say if one were to believe in a god, the earth would be the most obvious choice.

I'm also talking about science. How is anything I said not scientific?

And yes I would say that nurturing is part of nature, but not always in tune with nature.

WARPATH
11-25-2008, 01:24 PM
Everything can't be defined by comparing/fusing/evaluating two different ideas/object/matter. Somethings can but there are always other variables. Pinning it to single philosophy is probably not the best way to look at the world, but works for some.

Prince Rai
11-25-2008, 01:40 PM
Everything can't be defined by comparing/fusing/evaluating two different ideas/object/matter. Somethings can but there are always other variables. Pinning it to single philosophy is probably not the best way to look at the world, but works for some.

you are right,

the way i see it however is that the surrounding variables and influences are either generated and/or "married" with the fundamental forces to begin with.

dezmond
11-25-2008, 01:54 PM
I agree, we do learn a lot of other people's mistakes and bad deeds. We are also exposed to the perception of "good" with the Laws that govern our everyday lives.

My main point was directed towards the idea that we ARE allowed to make mistakes, not meant to be a cliche, but we are allowed to make them and from those mistakes correct ourselves.



Yep..

Glad you said that..

Personally experiencing somethin good or bad, ingrains itelf into your sub-concious therefore becoming almost instinctive....

Lerning from other peoples mistakes requires thinking things thru & evaluating & shit.. Which we know is not reallly an option nowdays...

You live in London yeah?

Me im close so know what things are actually like "on the streets"..

Peace

WARPATH
11-25-2008, 04:39 PM
you are right,

the way i see it however is that the surrounding variables and influences are either generated and/or "married" with the fundamental forces to begin with.

Ahh.......well when you put it like that it makes sense to me.

David Columbine
11-26-2008, 04:15 AM
I'm also talking about science. How is anything I said not scientific?

And yes I would say that nurturing is part of nature, but not always in tune with nature.

I did not say that you were not speaking in a scientific point of view, i was talking about myself.

Thats exactly it, it is in tune, you might percieve some actions of nurture as being negative to the person that is being directly effected, but it is just natures way of dealing with the human race.

In the animal kingdom some animals are rejected at birth and therefore die, if that happened in humanity that would be classed as pure evil, yet in the animal kingdom it is part of life, in order for the strong to survive the weak must must die.

Its the same with humans, you hear some people who have gone through the most horrendous up-bringing (nuture) but have grown up to be very sucessfull people. (Dave Peltzer comes in to mind straight away)
Some people who have had a hard up-bringing end up killing themselves of aligning themself with the negative (self-destructive) side of life therefore slowly killing themself.
This is nature/nurtures way of sorting the weak from the strong in the human race.

ShaolinDarts
11-26-2008, 10:30 AM
Allow me to begin my brief introduction of this theme by showing you the following picture:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y18/princerai/yin-yang.jpg


What we clearly see is the famous Yin-Yang circle of duality where two forces are opposite each other but also intertwine.

This will also be the benchmark theorem that I will use to explain my take on Man and his own inner relationship.


You see, for "good" to exist we require a certain "bad" benchmark so that we can describe the "good" that we want to see.

This dual nature of things is vital for our universe. Without light, there is no "darkness" as we know it, because if there was no light, we would assume darkness to be just a standard thing that always existed and we would pay no attention to it, we would think "vision" does not exist and that we were all born blind.

What I am getting at here is that Humans exhibit similar dual relationships within ourselves.

We strive hard to be "good" people, but we must also understand the philosophy that we ARE Yin Yang circles where there is an opposite force inside us that intertwines with our desire to be good.

In order for us to be "good" permanently, ought we allow ourselves to be "bad" at times, in order to get a better picture of how "good" we can become?


I hope the concept I brought forward can be grasped by the way I explained myself, if there is some confusion please let me know and I will try and explain further. My initial aim was not to write an essay, but a paragraph to start something.

With all due respect I disagree.

You say that to be good there has to be a benchmark of bad. This implies that the two are seperate. But they are not. Good and bad are just words given to varying degrees of the same thing. Moreover, these two concepts are just 'made up'. Because if there really was duality, then there would be one or the other in each person. But there is not and people exhibit their actions and we label them good or bad.

Love and hate, anger and peace and sorrow and joy are all one and the same. E.g. many times people cry in happiness, such as when they get married. But crying is associated with sorrow and not joy. Yet this person did not choose to cry, it just happened. So how can sorrow and joy be different except in that they have been defined as different because whatever lies under the human is crying in both.

The idea of balance, IMHO, is a method of overcomplicating things. Concepts such as good and bad cannot be seperated as they are really the same thing. The oppsoite of love is hate. Do I really need to hate in order to love? Moreover isn't hate just a less varying degree of affection as is used in love?

Isn't the idea of duality in human beings a contradiction in itself? If a person has to know bad to know good then doesn't that in itself imply that they are the same thing thing. Because if they were two different concepts then a bad person would need to stop being a bad person first and then be a good one, otherwise regardless of how good he was, he would remain a bad person until he stopped doing all bad things. But thats not the reality because no one does one or the other.

Prince Rai
11-26-2008, 12:35 PM
With all due respect I disagree.

I welcome that, Peace..

You say that to be good there has to be a benchmark of bad. This implies that the two are seperate. But they are not. Good and bad are just words given to varying degrees of the same thing. Moreover, these two concepts are just 'made up'. Because if there really was duality, then there would be one or the other in each person. But there is not and people exhibit their actions and we label them good or bad.

I understand your point fully and there are fundamental elements of truth here. I just want to point out where you missed my point and where perhaps I did not explain myself fully enough given that I wanted to write more of a paragraph first than an essay to invite differing views.

In regards to "This implies they are separate". I FUNDAMENTALLY disagree with them being separate. I think I somewhat addressed this point later on in a post.

Good and Bad are indeed opposite but they regardless of face value meaning, intertwine with each other. The element of togetherness of the two opposite "meanings" put substance and value to a specific ideology.
For example, if we never fell ill, we would not value our health as much or at least not find the substance of our health. Illness defines and shapes my condition of good health. Yes "health" is subjective from person to person, but the terms still contribute to your individual understanding of your own situation.


Love and hate, anger and peace and sorrow and joy are all one and the same. E.g. many times people cry in happiness, such as when they get married. But crying is associated with sorrow and not joy. Yet this person did not choose to cry, it just happened. So how can sorrow and joy be different except in that they have been defined as different because whatever lies under the human is crying in both.

"love and hate, anger and peace and sorrow and joy" are indeed the same in the context of the Yin-Yang circle. The circle encompasses both aspects into ONE entity.
As for sorrow and joy, "crying" is not a direct opposite of either sorrow or joy. It's association with one more than the other does not define the theory I used, it is just a side characteristic that compliments one of the key terms. Hence we cry when we are BOTH joyful or sad. What sadness or happiness does however, is to define and determine our individualistic degree of joy or sorrow.


The idea of balance, IMHO, is a method of overcomplicating things. Concepts such as good and bad cannot be seperated as they are really the same thing. The oppsoite of love is hate. Do I really need to hate in order to love? Moreover isn't hate just a less varying degree of affection as is used in love?

Again, love and hate compliment each other and work hand in hand. Whatever side you are leaning towards in regards to love and hate only allows you to appreciate and understand the opposite position. However you interpret the terms is based on you yourself. The Yin-Yang is no objective philosophy, but a subjective matter that deserves some curiosity.


Isn't the idea of duality in human beings a contradiction in itself? If a person has to know bad to know good then doesn't that in itself imply that they are the same thing thing. Because if they were two different concepts then a bad person would need to stop being a bad person first and then be a good one, otherwise regardless of how good he was, he would remain a bad person until he stopped doing all bad things. But thats not the reality because no one does one or the other.

The way you have interpreted my thought on duality has somewhat made you believe that I see two persons in one. I don't.

We are people who do good things and bad things, and that's merely that. We are not two people, one being nice and one being bad. No.
We are a circle encompassing two "words" which compliment and define each other to support its' fundamental truth.

Peace

WARPATH
11-26-2008, 12:59 PM
I did not say that you were not speaking in a scientific point of view, i was talking about myself.

Thats exactly it, it is in tune, you might percieve some actions of nurture as being negative to the person that is being directly effected, but it is just natures way of dealing with the human race.

In the animal kingdom some animals are rejected at birth and therefore die, if that happened in humanity that would be classed as pure evil, yet in the animal kingdom it is part of life, in order for the strong to survive the weak must must die.

Its the same with humans, you hear some people who have gone through the most horrendous up-bringing (nuture) but have grown up to be very sucessfull people. (Dave Peltzer comes in to mind straight away)
Some people who have had a hard up-bringing end up killing themselves of aligning themself with the negative (self-destructive) side of life therefore slowly killing themself.
This is nature/nurtures way of sorting the weak from the strong in the human race.

I see, and agree with what your saying.

I think what I was referring to is tearing up the earth to wear metals on our neck and fingers, dropping bombs on shit, etc........shit we don't necessarily need. I'm not promoting living in the bone age, but I am saying we should develop technologies, lifestyles, and politics that are more environmental friendly before we fuck it up to point where are great grand children are left with a shitty mess.

Sure people need to die, they always have and always will, one way or another. But who's to say what population the earth can support when people are working with it as opposed to messing it up.

We are nurturing a lifestyle that doesn't agree with nature.

DRUNKENDRAGON
11-26-2008, 04:18 PM
I think the principle of yin/yang is not fully understood in this arguement. The two forces do not "intertwine" together, each CONTAINS the other.

David Columbine
11-26-2008, 04:25 PM
Please elaborate

Prince Rai
11-26-2008, 04:48 PM
I think the principle of yin/yang is not fully understood in this arguement. The two forces do not "intertwine" together, each CONTAINS the other.

from a logical perspective, if they contained each other, would they not seize giving substance to each other?

in·ter·twine (ntr-twn)
tr. & intr.v. in·ter·twined, in·ter·twin·ing, in·ter·twines
To join or become joined by twining together.

I believe this picture illustrates this form of intertwining quite well:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y18/princerai/yin-yang-2.jpg

What we see here is a cycle which keeps joining itself, thus infinite in it's purpose. From one end to the other, to the other, to the other. The only "containment" is the physical 360 degree circle in the picture depicting the illustration. The philosophy itself needs more explanation.

Peace

DRUNKENDRAGON
11-26-2008, 04:52 PM
Please elaborate

Yin/yang's meaning is more then just duality, look at each half of the diagram (the diagram shown is called a tai-chi or grand ultimate, yes just like the martial art). The dots of the opposing force's color are found inside each. The dot denotes that WITHIN each force the other can be found.
Once you understand this the duality principle as taught by the tai-chi becomes alot more deep. It's not as if you "must have evil to know what is good", it is to imply that all things have within them the inate ability to be one or the other or both at the same time, or neither.

DRUNKENDRAGON
11-26-2008, 04:54 PM
from a logical perspective, if they contained each other, would they not seize giving substance to each other?

in·ter·twine (ntr-twn)
tr. & intr.v. in·ter·twined, in·ter·twin·ing, in·ter·twines
To join or become joined by twining together.

I believe this picture illustrates this form of intertwining quite well:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y18/princerai/yin-yang-2.jpg

What we see here is a cycle which keeps joining itself, thus infinite in it's purpose. From one end to the other, to the other, to the other. The only "containment" is the physical 360 degree circle in the picture depicting the illustration. The philosophy itself needs more explanation.

Peace

This is not the tai-chi, this is a pa kua although both do use yin/yang principle.

Prince Rai
11-26-2008, 04:54 PM
^ read all the posts...

and you will realise the evolution.

Prince Rai
11-26-2008, 04:57 PM
This is not the tai-chi, this is a pa kua although both do use yin/yang principle.

the Yin Yang principle is a wide ranging one. It also underpins the nature of duality in man.

The duality in question is NOT a man possessing two personas in one, but one person elevating himself by virtue of utilising the bounties of dualism in nature to protect and improve himself.

DRUNKENDRAGON
11-26-2008, 06:17 PM
from a logical perspective, if they contained each other, would they not seize giving substance to each other?

in·ter·twine (ntr-twn)
tr. & intr.v. in·ter·twined, in·ter·twin·ing, in·ter·twines
To join or become joined by twining together.

I believe this picture illustrates this form of intertwining quite well:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y18/princerai/yin-yang-2.jpg

What we see here is a cycle which keeps joining itself, thus infinite in it's purpose. From one end to the other, to the other, to the other. The only "containment" is the physical 360 degree circle in the picture depicting the illustration. The philosophy itself needs more explanation.

Peace

I know what intwertwine means, do you know what twine means?

twine (twhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/imacr.gifn)
v. twined, twin·ing, twines
v.tr. 1. To twist together (threads, for example); intertwine.
2. To form by twisting, intertwining, or interlacing.
3. To encircle or coil about: The fence post was twined by vines.
4. To wind, coil, or wrap around something: "She was twining a wisp of hair very slowly around her fingers" Anne Tyler.

v.intr. 1. To become twisted, interlaced, or interwoven.
2. To go in a winding course; twist about: a stream twining through the forest.

n. 1. A strong string or cord made of two or more threads twisted together.
2. Something formed by twining: a twine of bread dough.
3. A tangle; a knot.


The Tai-Chi most certainly DOES NOT intertwine nor teach anything similar to such.

Prince Rai
11-27-2008, 12:12 PM
I know what intwertwine means, do you know what twine means?

twine (twhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/imacr.gifn)
v. twined, twin·ing, twines
v.tr. 1. To twist together (threads, for example); intertwine.
2. To form by twisting, intertwining, or interlacing.
3. To encircle or coil about: The fence post was twined by vines.
4. To wind, coil, or wrap around something: "She was twining a wisp of hair very slowly around her fingers" Anne Tyler.

v.intr. 1. To become twisted, interlaced, or interwoven.
2. To go in a winding course; twist about: a stream twining through the forest.

n. 1. A strong string or cord made of two or more threads twisted together.
2. Something formed by twining: a twine of bread dough.
3. A tangle; a knot.


The Tai-Chi most certainly DOES NOT intertwine nor teach anything similar to such.

lol take it easy buddy.

Apart from the fact that I never used the lone term "twine" ever in this thread, neither has anybody else if I am remembering correctly here.

Now, what we have is your explanation of the word twine which undoubtedly connects with intertwine as exemplified by your learned post.

To form by twisting, intertwining, or interlacing.
3. To encircle or coil about


Reading that and much of the other description, are you seriously telling me that it does not describe the Yin-Yang circle and theorem?

"to encircle":

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y18/princerai/yin-yang.jpg

in⋅ter⋅lace   [in-ter-leys, in-ter-leys] Show IPA Pronunciation
verb, -laced, -lac⋅ing.
–verb (used without object)
1. to cross one another, typically passing alternately over and under, as if woven together; intertwine

^ Again, in line with your point of both containing each other, does not the above describe that to a certain degree?


Im just saying,

re-read and think about your post and the posts of others and mine and perhaps you will consider what I had said and built upon with others.

Peace

Big Risk
11-27-2008, 12:24 PM
Did you know the original ying yang's black side was the unstable, negative energy. And they believe it came from a woman.

Prince Rai
11-27-2008, 12:39 PM
Did you know the original ying yang's black side was the unstable, negative energy. And they believe it came from a woman.

The black side is referred to as Yin is I am correct.

And yes it is know to encompass the female, and usually negative energy.

But the beauty is that, in the yin-yang philosophy one is not without the other, meaning that it is not wrong to be on the side that IS "wrong", because as has been discussed by others on the thread, the "opposites" only describe or entail a wider picture which on the whole is good and balanced.

Peace

dezmond
11-27-2008, 12:47 PM
One Would be nothing without the Other..

Prince Rai
11-27-2008, 12:52 PM
One Would be nothing without the Other..

lol word!

Guarded By Martyrs
11-27-2008, 12:53 PM
Sylar from "Heroes"

Gabriel Gray being the Ying.
Sylar being the Yang.

As Gabriel Gray all his life,with an extrordinary gift of knowing how things work.
A watchmaker by day his accuraccy is flawless.
Yet he has kept a dark force bottled inside, the Yang
And a want of being special and beliving he isn't in the the family he belongs in.
Filled with an overwealming disire for knowlegde and a gift of knowing how things work
For those who don't know...
A man walks into his shop and Gabriel can tell his watch is 2 seconds slow.
He knows how things work and fixes it quickly.
The man is a scientist who belives he may have an "ability"
Then hearing : "Theoretically Speaking If The Soul Exists...It Exists In The Brain"
Gabriel is not the only person the scientist is intending on seeing
And takes the details of one of the names.
The man has telekinesis, inviting the man to his workshop
Upon entering he asks Gabriel his name...
Looking down seeing a watch with the brandname Sylar
He replies : "My Name Is Sylar"
He seems is unhappy and asks Gabriel if he can make it go away ?!?!?
Shocked...the new man in the room "Sylar" sees clearly what he can...
And what he belives he must do, he kills the man and opens the top of his skull.
He can see the brain like he sees the watch, he knows how things work.
After this...Sylar now has telekinesis.

Sorry for the length, but I read through the thread, and this was shouting out at me.

What I find interesting is, that instead of just doing it as himself...
He created a new name, seperate to that of what he belive is his true self
And done something that Gabriel just couldn't see himself doing.
Thats very interesting, and key to what your saying Rai = "The Dual" had been born.
Be it Annakin Skywalker vs Darth Vader, Dr. Jekyll vs Mr. Hyde ect...
The need for seperation is clear, even the brain is made of two halfs.

The need for balance is also crucial, if the balnce is tipped to drastically
The two can not live in harmony, or at least survive :

If he suppresses the hunger, fights against it, he would become softer
Therefor making him an easier target/opponent

If he lets the hunger control him he would become unstable/wreckless
Almost unstoppable, like how the bad guys or the darkness
Are always deeper in skill, yet the light shines brightest in/against the dark
Very interesting.

Dope thread Prince.

THE MASON
11-28-2008, 10:46 AM
If he suppresses the hunger, fights against it, he would become softer
Therefor making him an easier target/opponent

If he lets the hunger control him he would become unstable/wreckless
Almost unstoppable, like how the bad guys or the darkness
Are always deeper in skill, yet the light shines brightest in/against the dark
Very interesting.

Dope thread Prince.

True words well said whers.

its like duality builds a grey area between the good and the bad inside yourself.

pulling from one side or the other too much leads to that imbalance in energy, on of my friends is a yoga teacher and has taught me lots on how to meditate and balance these two sides. Once you can control/balance these forces life becomes alot clearer and more enjoyable

Prince Rai
11-28-2008, 01:05 PM
I watch Heroes religiously and by you bringing the theme on here is pretty dope.

I see what you are saying with Sylar, we do see two opposites colliding together and in the programme we see how the inability to balance out both urges leads you to nowhere.

Pecaee

Face of the Golden Falcon
11-28-2008, 06:22 PM
P.E.A.C.E and Blessings...

...some really good things being said.

I think what DRUNKENDRAGON may have been trying to get at (possibly) is that with the word intertwining we had a definition such as:


in·ter·twine (ntr-twn)
tr. & intr.v. in·ter·twined, in·ter·twin·ing, in·ter·twines
To join or become joined by twining together.



...the problem here is that this speaks of...

http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/7f122238c3.jpg

...The concept of Yin and Yang however is that the 2 do not become 1 through any sort of process or relationship to each other. They are one to begin with, manifesting as a duality for the purpose of the existence of the "objective" world.

Sort of like a coin, I guess, it is one but also has 2 sides (not the most actuarate metaphor but it'll have to do).

SHEM HETEP

Face of the Golden Falcon
11-28-2008, 06:24 PM
P.E.A.C.E and Blessings...

...some really good things being said.

I think what DRUNKENDRAGON may have been trying to get at (possibly) is that with the word intertwining we had a definition such as:


in·ter·twine (ntr-twn)
tr. & intr.v. in·ter·twined, in·ter·twin·ing, in·ter·twines
To join or become joined by twining together.



...the problem here is that this speaks of...

http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/7f122238c3.jpg

...The concept of Yin and Yang however is that the 2 do not become 1 through any sort of process or relationship to each other. They are one to begin with, manifesting as a duality for the purpose of the existence of the "objective" world.

Sort of like a coin, I guess, it is one but also has 2 sides (not the most actuarate metaphor but it'll have to do).

SHEM HETEP

DRUNKENDRAGON
11-28-2008, 06:48 PM
lol take it easy buddy.

Apart from the fact that I never used the lone term "twine" ever in this thread, neither has anybody else if I am remembering correctly here.

Now, what we have is your explanation of the word twine which undoubtedly connects with intertwine as exemplified by your learned post.

To form by twisting, intertwining, or interlacing.
3. To encircle or coil about


Reading that and much of the other description, are you seriously telling me that it does not describe the Yin-Yang circle and theorem?

"to encircle":

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y18/princerai/yin-yang.jpg

in⋅ter⋅lace   [in-ter-leys, in-ter-leys] Show IPA Pronunciation
verb, -laced, -lac⋅ing.
–verb (used without object)
1. to cross one another, typically passing alternately over and under, as if woven together; intertwine

^ Again, in line with your point of both containing each other, does not the above describe that to a certain degree?


Im just saying,

re-read and think about your post and the posts of others and mine and perhaps you will consider what I had said and built upon with others.

Peace

Intertwine is a derivative of the word twine.

I so sick of people in here posting all these "look at me I'm smart" threads that go ahead use something (the Tai-Chi in this case) that they have a less than complete understanding of to try and display some ill-conceived and half assed philosophy that doesn't even make any sense.

The TITLE OF THE THREAD doesn't even make sense "The relationship between the duality of man"... The relationship between IT and WHAT?

Prince Rai
11-28-2008, 07:11 PM
Intertwine is a derivative of the word twine.

I so sick of people in here posting all these "look at me I'm smart" threads that go ahead use something (the Tai-Chi in this case) that they have a less than complete understanding of to try and display some ill-conceived and half assed philosophy that doesn't even make any sense.

The TITLE OF THE THREAD doesn't even make sense "The relationship between the duality of man"... The relationship between IT and WHAT?


damn, throw some water over your head.

take it easy, from my first post i said I was being as vague as possible to let poeple discuss and not cry about it.

If you don't like the thread, you know what you can do, stay out lol and stop insulting people with "look at me i'm smart", because I have never done that. If you feel like that, the weakness lies with you.

Civilison
11-28-2008, 08:26 PM
duality is a fundamental state in any existence.

on the physical plane we have:
energy/matter

on the spiritual plane we have:
will/consciousness

In the atom we have:
the positive proton and the negative electron

the polarities of electromagnetism, the binary number, male/female, day/night etc...

these are all manifestations of the exact same metaphysical concept that in order for differentiation to happen there must be duality to have opposition in order to have interaction in order to have life. the true meaning of the yin&yang.
PEACE

Face of the Golden Falcon
11-28-2008, 08:26 PM
P.E.A.C.E and Blessings DRAGON...

...to echo Prince Rai slightly, the point of a forum is to put forth your opinion and understanding of a subject regardless of how "complete" your understanding is. If we all only ever posted when we had nothing left to learn then it'd be a ghost forum. Prince Rai started this thread in all sincerity, has welcomed other ideas and even changed his opinion when different points of view have been put forth. If you have a more complete understanding of the subject then add-on and build peacefully, instead of being "sick of" people who are building peacefully.

SHEM HETEP

DRUNKENDRAGON
11-28-2008, 11:45 PM
P.E.A.C.E and Blessings DRAGON...

...to echo Prince Rai slightly, the point of a forum is to put forth your opinion and understanding of a subject regardless of how "complete" your understanding is. If we all only ever posted when we had nothing left to learn then it'd be a ghost forum. Prince Rai started this thread in all sincerity, has welcomed other ideas and even changed his opinion when different points of view have been put forth. If you have a more complete understanding of the subject then add-on and build peacefully, instead of being "sick of" people who are building peacefully.

SHEM HETEP

I could care less what is being debated in here, it's the misuse of the taichi that is what's offensive to me. It was not even referred to it by it's proper name, how about i post a picture of the cross and call it a giant letter T or the sun, moon and stars and call it a little solar system and proceed to spew some random thought in it's name? Same shit.

Prince Rai
11-29-2008, 01:47 AM
duality is a fundamental state in any existence.

on the physical plane we have:
energy/matter

on the spiritual plane we have:
will/consciousness

In the atom we have:
the positive proton and the negative electron

the polarities of electromagnetism, the binary number, male/female, day/night etc...

these are all manifestations of the exact same metaphysical concept that in order for differentiation to happen there must be duality to have opposition in order to have interaction in order to have life. the true meaning of the yin&yang.
PEACE

i agree with this.

you show a balanced view in my opinion and your last point sums up my exact view.

Peace

Civilison
11-29-2008, 02:13 AM
peace

Face of the Golden Falcon
11-29-2008, 05:22 AM
P.E.A.C.E and Blessing DRAGON...

I could care less what is being debated in here, it's the misuse of the taichi that is what's offensive to me. It was not even referred to it by it's proper name, how about i post a picture of the cross and call it a giant letter T or the sun, moon and stars and call it a little solar system and proceed to spew some random thought in it's name? Same shit.

Go for it. Hopefully though someone will correct you on your random thoughts of this giant letter T without attacking you. Which is what you have done.

SHEM HETEP

diggy
11-30-2008, 02:08 AM
Love and hate, anger and peace and sorrow and joy are all one and the same. E.g. many times people cry in happiness, such as when they get married. But crying is associated with sorrow and not joy. Yet this person did not choose to cry, it just happened. So how can sorrow and joy be different except in that they have been defined as different because whatever lies under the human is crying in both.

I disagree.

Just because a person can cry in happiness and cry in sorrow does not make happiness and sorrow the same. Apparently you've linked those two emotions together just because crying could be commited while experiencing both - which is illogical.


How are "love and hate" and "anger and peace" the same?









...The concept of Yin and Yang however is that the 2 do not become 1 through any sort of process or relationship to each other. They are one to begin with, manifesting as a duality for the purpose of the existence of the "objective" world.

Sort of like a coin, I guess, it is one but also has 2 sides (not the most actuarate metaphor but it'll have to do).

SHEM HETEP



I disagree.

Is light and dark the same?






You see, I can explain my duality in the sense that for a baby to have been born in the first place, the coming of two opposites had to occur and intertwine.

How are man and woman opposites?

David Columbine
11-30-2008, 06:40 AM
How are man and woman opposites?

Ones got a penis the others got a vagina.

Prince Rai
11-30-2008, 03:54 PM
I disagree.

Is light and dark the same?

Good question but I shall address this by answering both questions posed.

No, light and dark are not the same they are opposites. However what they share is substance. Darkness can contain just as much substance as light, the only difference is that one can be seen and one cannot. < I am addressing this part as literal as possible to highlight my point.

Thus, if we fiddle with the angle of interpretation a little, we can still come to a reasonable conclusion that certain opposites encompass a somewhat unitarian realm.

This leads me to the next question...


How are man and woman opposites?


I respect you and know that you meant something else with the question.

Yes, women and men are both Humans and thus "one".

However, there are differences owing to sexuality. It is known that the opposite gender of man is woman.

By virtue of Penis and Vagina and it's attributes, we cement the cardinal differences between man and woman giving them "opposite" values.

Your question however underlined my point from the answer for the first question that two opposites underline a common realm.

Man and Woman ARE opposites but in union, represent humanity.

Just like the Yin-Yang philosophy.

Two opposites but in union working in conjunction.


Peace and Blessings

David Columbine
11-30-2008, 04:48 PM
However, there are differences owing to sexuality. It is known that the opposite gender of man is woman.

By virtue of Penis and Vagina and it's attributes, we cement the cardinal differences between man and woman giving them "opposite" values.



Haha

diggy
11-30-2008, 05:04 PM
How are man and woman opposites?

Ones got a penis the others got a vagina.


That does not mean man and woman are opposites.

diggy
11-30-2008, 05:25 PM
No, light and dark are not the same they are opposites. However what they share is substance. Darkness can contain just as much substance as light, the only difference is that one can be seen and one cannot. < I am addressing this part as literal as possible to highlight my point.



I disagree.

When there is light, there is no darkness, and when there is darkness there is no light. I don't know what is the "substance" you are talking about.

Can you prove it?


Yes, women and men are both Humans and thus "one".

However, there are differences owing to sexuality. It is known that the opposite gender of man is woman.

By virtue of Penis and Vagina and it's attributes, we cement the cardinal differences between man and woman giving them "opposite" values.

Your question however underlined my point from the answer for the first question that two opposites underline a common realm.

Man and Woman ARE opposites but in union, represent humanity.

Just like the Yin-Yang philosophy.

Two opposites but in union working in conjunction.


Peace and Blessings

That is on the physical level.

I'm talking on another level.

I basically see men as women with additional attributes.

Does that make us opposites? Not in my opinion. For example, as babies, we are first female, then turn male. Also, we have MORE testosterone than females (the also have some).

We have ability to be MORE rational than them. We possess MORE physical strength and bravery than them.

We are MORE direct and straight forward than them.

But, in my opinion, I do not see how they are our opposites, we just have what they have plus more.

Prince Rai
11-30-2008, 05:41 PM
I disagree.

When there is light, there is no darkness, and when there is darkness there is no light. I don't know what is the "substance" you are talking about.

Can you prove it?

the universe was once darkness before the big bang, but somehow wasn't.
a black hole swallows light, but contains substance.
light is substance itself, by virtue of rays and waves.



That is on the physical level.

I'm talking on another level.

I basically see men as women with additional attributes.

Does that make us opposites? Not in my opinion. For example, as babies, we are first female, then turn male. Also, we have MORE testosterone than females (the also have some).

We have ability to be MORE rational than them. We possess MORE physical strength and bravery than them.

We are MORE direct and straight forward than them.

But, in my opinion, I do not see how they are our opposites, we just have what they have plus more.

your opinion is respected. i agree that males and females have similarities, but on paper and in essence of gender, we are opposite.
that's like expressing that saying a truth and a lie is the same because they both use words and similar grammatical structures, only that the lie is more obscene and more worse.




peace

PALEFORCE
11-30-2008, 10:53 PM
dope topic prince

PALEFORCE
11-30-2008, 10:57 PM
shit i hit enter prematurely anyway...
yea
this is real
the hermetica talks about this alot. it calls it the merging of the twin flames.
its what i strive for
the way i see it ...in modern society...we are co-dependant and we need to become more independent and instead of society being structured like a pyramid it should be structured like a circle...i know its a little off topic but at the same time is relevent

Civilison
11-30-2008, 11:13 PM
^ yeah sustainability... time to get them solar panels installed lord!

PALEFORCE
11-30-2008, 11:19 PM
sustainabil;ity should definiatley be the status qou but there are other free technologies way more effective then solar power

Civilison
11-30-2008, 11:31 PM
yeah no doubt just used a general example

WARPATH
12-03-2008, 11:22 AM
Are any of you guyss Asian or were born into culture, where this actually taught and not something you picked up because......."the yin and yang looks cool, and the philosophy is dope dawg, and ninjas are cool?"


Yeah I didn't think so. Unless one of these Asian cats come in here and sort this shit out then.....

END THREAD, because you all sound like some retards trying to talk about it.

Otherwise keep it about duality without trying throw in some philosophy your not hip too, ya dig?

Peace.

David Columbine
12-03-2008, 12:46 PM
That's why i left this thread ages ago, it got a bit to pretentious.

Civilison
12-03-2008, 10:40 PM
Are any of you guyss Asian or were born into culture, where this actually taught and not something you picked up because......."the yin and yang looks cool, and the philosophy is dope dawg, and ninjas are cool?"


Yeah I didn't think so. Unless one of these Asian cats come in here and sort this shit out then.....

END THREAD, because you all sound like some retards trying to talk about it.

Otherwise keep it about duality without trying throw in some philosophy your not hip too, ya dig?

Peace.

get outta here wit the nonsense
dont come in into the knowledge section then

Prince Rai
12-04-2008, 05:17 PM
Are any of you guyss Asian or were born into culture, where this actually taught and not something you picked up because......."the yin and yang looks cool, and the philosophy is dope dawg, and ninjas are cool?"


Yeah I didn't think so. Unless one of these Asian cats come in here and sort this shit out then.....

END THREAD, because you all sound like some retards trying to talk about it.

Otherwise keep it about duality without trying throw in some philosophy your not hip too, ya dig?

Peace.

I am "asian" and in my culture, eastern philosophies are very important.

I fundamentally believe however that the issue at hand is not of race.

That is absurd.

It is true that some have made ridiculous remarks here, but if we do not encourage or allow debate on anything, then knowledge gets boundaries which is potentially counter-productive.

Peace

WARPATH
12-04-2008, 05:30 PM
I am "asian" and in my culture, eastern philosophies are very important.

I fundamentally believe however that the issue at hand is not of race.

That is absurd.

It is true that some have made ridiculous remarks here, but if we do not encourage or allow debate on anything, then knowledge gets boundaries which is potentially counter-productive.

Peace

Oh no, I was not aiming that at the original post, or else that would have been my original post. I just seems like the topic was getting stagnant.

CONTINUE THREAD.

Prince Rai
12-04-2008, 05:33 PM
Peace Slippy..
I will ad on tomorrow

WARPATH
12-04-2008, 05:43 PM
get outta here wit the nonsense
dont come in into the knowledge section then


No, you have it twisted. I want to hold people accountable for what their saying, and see the overall quality of this section improve into healthy building/debate. That is why I don't participate in the repetitive beef threads, mumbo jumbo non-sense of CHILDREN asserting their knowledge over ADULTS, and the general circle jerkulation this section creates.

And i'm not trying too beef with anyone either. Just come wiff da heat or not at all. Peace.

Topic restarts is 5...4...3...2......

Civilison
12-04-2008, 09:07 PM
i dont have it twisted i c what ur sayin but what u were saying before didn't make no sense g, therefore you're coming off like you're budda tryin to chopp ppls heads in the meantime u werent really making much sense and im like the fuk? cuz i dont mumble bro i build. so lets all add on to the cipher and create the most productive forum we can. there aint no heat here either, we're not boxin its jus words so lets be wise about what we speak.
PEACE

ShaolinDarts
12-06-2008, 04:36 AM
I disagree.

Just because a person can cry in happiness and cry in sorrow does not make happiness and sorrow the same. Apparently you've linked those two emotions together just because crying could be commited while experiencing both - which is illogical.


How are "love and hate" and "anger and peace" the same?

I believe that they are the same because, e.g. love and hate, are varying degrees of the same emotion. They are not opposite entities but rather they are opposite ends of the same entity.

WARPATH
12-08-2008, 11:03 AM
i dont have it twisted i c what ur sayin but what u were saying before didn't make no sense g, therefore you're coming off like you're budda tryin to chopp ppls heads in the meantime u werent really making much sense and im like the fuk? cuz i dont mumble bro i build. so lets all add on to the cipher and create the most productive forum we can. there aint no heat here either, we're not boxin its jus words so lets be wise about what we speak.
PEACE

Your first lesson in Duality.

Sometimes Booodah needs to chop heads to keep the cabbage patch culled. This is the balance to encourage growth. peace.

Civilison
12-08-2008, 10:37 PM
watch which patch you cull

LORD NOSE
05-18-2010, 10:26 PM
great

praise the almitey W
05-19-2010, 11:30 AM
so your basically saying we need the good and the bad to cancel out eachother for the sake of order and that ever once in a while we need the ggod to overcome the bad and the bad to overcome the good right? that way life is much simpler than just being a saint everyday or being some crackhead physchopath because you never have to choose but you can choose both be generous and give homeless homes and smoke weed perfect combiation.