The Quest for Meaning

[Iacchus]

Personally, I do not believe the point of the word "mystery" is inherently reliant on the existence of a soul (the reason being that I dont believe in souls, yet I recognize the word as quite meaningful), what makes you think otherwise?

And yet this would seem to be the very origin of the word mystery wouldn't it?

Definition of the word mystery from Merrium Webster Online ...

Main Entry: 1 mys·tery
Pronunciation: 'mis-t(&-)rE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ter·ies
Etymology: Middle English mysterie, from Latin mysterium, from Greek mystErion, from mystEs initiate
1 a : a religious truth that one can know only by revelation and cannot fully understand b (1) : any of the 15 events (as the Nativity, the Crucifixion, or the Assumption) serving as a subject for meditation during the saying of the rosary (2) capitalized : a Christian sacrament; specifically : EUCHARIST c (1) : a secret religious rite believed (as in Eleusinian and Mithraic cults) to impart enduring bliss to the initiate (2) : a cult devoted to such rites
2 a : something not understood or beyond understanding : ENIGMA b obsolete : a private secret c : the secret or specialized practices or ritual peculiar to an occupation or a body of people [the mysteries of the tailor's craft] d : a piece of fiction dealing usually with the solution of a mysterious crime
3 : profound, inexplicable, or secretive quality or character [the mystery of her smile]

From the article:

I'm sure Cleopatra could tell more about the Eleusinian mysteries than I could, but I recognize the story a delightful allegory (much more straightforward than say the Bible), you next comment is rather interesting...

A rather controversial theory, but one worth considering, is the nature of Iacchus.

Well at least you can't claim that I came to these boards misrepresenting myself can you?

Little more than 1500 BCE, the time period believed to be the origin of the Eleusian Mysteries, the cultivating of barley and wheat was quite widespread. Age barley has a tendency to grow a fungus called "ergot", this ergot a hallucinogenic substance with much in common with LSD. During the initiation ceremonies, the members of the cult of Demeter-Persephone would injest food made of barley which may have contained ergot fungus. The Ergot puts the cult members in a state of psychosis, they begin to feel as though they are becoming aware of all the mysteries of life, the senses begin meld into one another to the point where a person can literally "feel" the shimmer of beautiful flowers and quite literally "taste" beautiful music. Ergot is suspected to be connected to the Salem Witch Trial, a psychological disease called Lycanthropy, and in mild cases Generalized Delusional Disorder.

I have to admit it does sound plausible.

Reasonably, the shouting of "IACCHUS!" will stir a crowd, they will begin to believe wholeheartedly that this Iacchus has been personified into something living, breathing, and undeniably real. This is not an unheard of phenomena, Native Americans have personified a number of dieties in response to hallucinogenic substances.

A "soul", I'm afraid not. Its likely the ceremonies of Cults of Demeter-Persephone involved the ingestion of a substance which merely played with people's minds, a bit of a leap of reason to call that the "soul", dont you think .

"Altered states," "hallucinogenics," it doesn't necessarily imply evidence to the contrary does it?

A funny story: I had a friend who used to live on a cow farm. He used to pick the mushrooms and eat them. Once, he did this with about 4 or 5 of his friends. After eating the mushrooms, they began to have the expected hallucinogenic effects. My friend says in his own words "I was just sitting there, and I felt my face just get up and start flying around the room". My friend describes that he saw the other guys in the room grabbing at the etheral face which is wafting around the room, these 5 individual people were all having the same hallucination. In reality, the hallucinations were varied though seemingly contingent... a TV was on in another room, a nature show was airing, it seems the words from the nature show had become personified.

This reminds me of the dream my friend had when he was on the couch snoring, and his grandmother came up to him and said, "You sure snore like a tornado!" And guess what? He had a dream about being caught up in tornado!

So what? It only goes to show that the material world is somehow connected to the spiritual world -- i.e., through the "portal" of our minds. Yes, and why shouldn't synchronicity keep showing up in this "numerology" stuff I keep talking about?

You dont need a soul to journey into the unknown

Of course what else can you say if you don't know what it is? -- or, even exists.

 

[Iacchus]

My Psychic powers are picking up on something, you seem to have fixation with "time".

Its very to express in words, but the concept is something you understand very well. You might notice thinking to yourself "I cant believe how much time has passed, it seems like an eternity...", following by that statement is a thought regarding those who are older than yourself. The feeling is almost "paradoxial" to contemplate.

Another relationship with Time that you notice: You think to yourself about things you would say others if you were to ever have a conversation or debate with them. 6 Months later, you contemplate the same scenario, you compare yourself of "now" with yourself of 6 months ago, you are delightfully amused by how naive you used to be.

I went off on a tangent on just an unusual phrasing of words, I'll stop myself because I have no idea how accurate my little Psychic description really is, or if it in fact is remotely related to the concept you were trying to get across.

Actually it's more like having two separate identities, which are constantly at odds with each other. Where the one pretty much goes through the motions and does what it takes to "get along," and the other has an entirely different view, and feels quite alientated by doing that which is mundane and "meaningless." This is the person who usually walks out the door at night, and doesn't bother to look back once "that mode" kicks in. In other words my being there has little or nothing to do with understanding who I am which, has been very important to me over the years.

While here I'm getting closer to the significance of the third name of the cat below, which basically says nobody can understand -- or, let's say most people are "unqualified" in this regard -- who I am but myself.

If I remember correctly, the left side of the brain expresses thought in terms of internal monologue, the right side of the brain is completely silent but does in fact express "thought" in terms of concepts and images. You can give a read of some of the split-brain studies and get a feel for the significance of the two hemisphere's expressions of thought.

So in that sense would you say the right brain is what defines our existence, which goes beyond words? (i.e., our perception).

The first name is called an "adoptive" or "assigned" name.

The second name is not a name, its a catergorization.

The third name... I'm not too sure about that. I have a lot of knowledge of cats, why I acquired this knowledge is questionable and open to speculation but that is besides the point. Cats do not usually respond to Assigned Names. We know cats are aware of their own existence, but whether they "identify" themselves is another story. Cats rely on non-lingual expressions for most communication, and the general scientific community believe cats are animals which understand the word in a highly conceptualized manner (as in, without words). In this case, cats may not call themselves by a name, they may simply recognize their own existence as a conceptualized expression of the word "me".

Actually what I'm speaking of here is the three degrees of knowledge. Where the first is knowledge obtained by association (like my example given at work above), the second is knowledge obtained through analysis (study), and the third is knowledge obtained by being the "it" which is being referred to. This is none other than a first hand account, or experience, and is the type of knowledge we "must" seek in order to discover one's soul.

 

[Iacchus]

And yet, what else could you expect from "me?" Ever get the feeling that nobody ever listens to "you?" Actually this is where the "soul's journey" begins, when you begin to experience feelings of being alone and isolated.

I see, the Transcendentalist self-discovery. Your description above is of special significance in relation to the title of this thread.

I want to describe something to you, you should be familiar with the story called "Moby Dick". I will quickly summarize Moby Dick in few paragraphs:

Actually I'm not that familiar with it, as I never really got a chance to read it. Although I understand Captain Ahab was very obsessed with "his quest," which was to destoy the whale.

The story is written by Herman Melville during a time where America was leaving behind its Contemporary Romanticism, and begining to embrace Realism. The story is symbolism and allegory from beginning to end.

Moby-Dick is narrated from the perspective of a common seafairer, named Ishmael, aboard Captain Ahab's ship, the Pequod. The story revolves around Captain Ahab's pursuit a white whale which took off his leg in the past.

The allegory is unique: Ahab represents human edurance, the ship represents humanity, and the whale is representitive of seemingly immortal absolute evil.

Ahab seeks the spiritual reality behind experience, Ahab sought meaning in all things (including the whale), he proclaimed in his search for Truth that it "hath no confines" meaning he was unwilling to accept human limatations. (Note: By the words "human limitations", I'm not implying there exists things that cannot be understood because physical limitations of the senses, I'm referring to the human's tendency to refuse to accept that there is very little worth in seeking the answer to the question "Why?").

While here I wouldn't equate an obsession with that which is transcendental, for transcendence is typically distant and aloof from such matters. However, I won't disagree that there are those who are obsessed, and claim to be on such a "holy quest." In fact I think "unholy" would be the better use of terms here.

Ishmael on the other hand, saw things completely in another light. Life, Ismael discovers, is no voyage into uncharted waters. It offers no certainties but only the ever-changing meanings of human experience. Ishmaels vision, we must live within our understanding, come to terms with our mortality, and welcome brotherhood with our own mortals. The ultimate mysteries of existence symbolized by the white whale are elusive. Ahab believes he see Moby-Dick as a principle of absolute evil (and as a symbol of the mysteries of life, he consquently viewed life an pitilessly cruel and savage in its own right), but Ishmael observes early in the novel that the whale has no face, no expression: people read their own meanings.

This is why people get locked up in prison by the way ... because they can't come to terms with the bitterness they've suffered in life, and find the need to blame and, take it out on others.

However, if they wish to become rehabilitated, this is the very nature they need to transcend. This is where the nature of forgiveness -- which, "is" transcendental -- comes in.

The book ends in the destruction of the Pequod and the death of Captain Ahab. Melville saw deep dangers in the transcendentalist desires to establish meaning for God, humanity, nature, and especially those things which exist beyond human sensibility.

Those who seek "meaning" and "understanding", especially absolute "meanings" and "understandings", decieve themselves. A cynical truth, but sometimes a rock is just a rock, and a whale is just a whale. A pitiful thing Ahab sought vengeance on this "absolute evil" which in reality, as Ishmael observed, is just a dumb brute of a fish which maimed Ahab out of nothing but blind instinct.

Yes, and how much easier is it for someone who has been deceived, to justify that which is unholy by that which is holy? In fact it becomes the ultimate escape away from oneself, especially if God says "it's okay."

So yes, this is the very thing you need to be weary of when approaching those who do things in the guise of religion. While mind you, it's not the religion that's bad!

I've brought up the point many times before about seeing "meaning", where it simply doesnt exist.

Well it's just like Dirty Harry said, "A man's got to understand his limitations."

Realism wins.

Would you consider Ghandi to be a realist? Or, an idealist? And how about Mother Theresa?

 

[RussDill]

So Friends, I invite you to sit awhile and hear a tale of Iacchus. If you thirst, here is a Sacred Cup filled with water from the Well of the Phoenix. May you Never Thirst!
[/B]

For someone who has had his fair share of phoenix ground water, I will respectfully decline.

 

[Yahweh]

So what? It only goes to show that the material world is somehow connected to the spiritual world -- i.e., through the "portal" of our minds. Yes, and why shouldn't synchronicity keep showing up in this "numerology" stuff I keep talking about?

I dont think it shows that the material world is connected to a "spiritual world", but I do think it says something about human nature (more specifically, it refers to psychological phenomena called "autosuggestion"... note: Autosuggestion is the driving force between hypnotism, televangelist faith healing, and an inherent inability to control your mind when I tell you "dont think of an apple").

Sorry to leave so much of your post unanswered, I suspect you comments have some amount of ulterior motives, but they are a bit too vague for me for to make sense of at the moment.

 

[Iacchus]

Sorry to leave so much of your post unanswered, I suspect you comments have some amount of ulterior motives, but they are a bit too vague for me for to make sense of at the moment.

Ulterior huh? Yeah I suppose that's a typical reaction for people who don't have grounds to agree with each other.

 

[Yahweh]

Actually it's more like having two separate identities, which are constantly at odds with each other. Where the one pretty much goes through the motions and does what it takes to "get along," and the other has an entirely different view, and feels quite alientated by doing that which is mundane and "meaningless." This is the person who usually walks out the door at night, and doesn't bother to look back once "that mode" kicks in. In other words my being there has little or nothing to do with understanding who I am which, has been very important to me over the years.

While here I'm getting closer to the significance of the third name of the cat below, which basically says nobody can understand -- or, let's say most people are "unqualified" in this regard -- who I am but myself.

Well, it appears you original statement...

"So, aside from the fact that I don't really belong to this crowd, why is it that I feel like I was never here?"

... makes a bit more sense now.

You ought to be familiar with deja vu. Its a feeling of "having done this before" where in reality you have not.

What about when you've done something before, but it feels like you are doing it for the first time? This is a phenomena called jamais vu.

Jamais vu is associated wit Delusional misidentification syndromes.

There is not a lot of information I could tell you right off the top of my head about jamais vu, but I do know its one of the key components in this psychological anomaly: Do you remember your first kiss? Sure, most everyone who has ever had a first kiss remembers it. How about the 50th, or the 100th, or the 1000th? No? What is so special about that first, what makes it different than the others that its written into your memory for eternity? Sometimes there are experiences where you can remember mundane events as if they had happened for the very first time, this is jamais vu.

The actual processes which are responsible for jamais vu are not established, though its related to the emotional position of what a person is at while experiencing a given scenario.

So in that sense would you say the right brain is what defines our existence, which goes beyond words? (i.e., our perception).

Define our existence? No, I would probably say being actual within reality in the form of matter and natural phenomena defines our existence.

The right hemisphere coordinates intelligence, memory, and perception. Flashing a picture of a screwdriver in the left eye (right hemisphere), the right hemisphere could pick out a screwdriver in a box (or a screw if there is one). But by itself, the right hemisphere could not tell you what that object is or how many are in the hand without looking at it.

The left hemisphere is the side of the brain where all the nifty speech and numerical cognitive functions are located.

Each side of the brain has its own set of tasks, they communicate with one another through a junction of about 300 million nerve fibers between the two hemispheres of the brain called the Corpus Callosum. The Corpus Callosum works to tune the independent "minds" in each hemisphere of the brain into one single unified "you".

Actually what I'm speaking of here is the three degrees of knowledge. Where the first is knowledge obtained by association (like my example given at work above), the second is knowledge obtained through analysis (study), and the third is knowledge obtained by being the "it" which is being referred to. This is none other than a first hand account, or experience, and is the type of knowledge we "must" seek in order to discover one's soul.

Ah, the personal knowledge conundrum.

More wisdom by G. E. Moore:

In his second verse of his essay "A Defense of Commonsense", he argues that there is a distinction between mental facts and physical facts. He says there is no good reason to hold, as many philosophers of his time did, that every physical fact is logically dependent on mental facts, or that every physical fact is causally dependent on mental facts. An example of a physical fact is "The mantlepiece is at present nearer to this body than that bookcase is." Mental facts include "I am conscious now" and "I am seeing something now."

Personal knowledge will only get you as far as immediate inner-sensations, it wont be of much help in determining anything about a soul if one exists.

 

[Yahweh]

Ulterior huh? Yeah I suppose that's a typical reaction for people who don't have grounds to agree with each other.

I notice you enjoy symbolism, is it unreasonable for me to assume you not only have an interested in gaining personal knowledge, but also teaching others about this knowledge

 

[Eos of the Eons]

We don't need some stupid soul separate from the human body in order to live. We just think we need it for when we are dead.

Who cares? You're dead. Life matters, not death.

What is the meaning to life? Life. Make sure it can continue on. Death is just a part of the renewal process. It's selfish to want to hang around when your time is up.

It's humanity as a whole that matters, not our individual selfish desire to live forever. For humanity to live on forever we need renewal. For there to be renewal, there has to be death.

If that's not meaningful enough, then tough.

 

[Iacchus]

We don't need some stupid soul separate from the human body in order to live. We just think we need it for when we are dead.

Who cares? You're dead. Life matters, not death.

What is the meaning to life? Life. Make sure it can continue on. Death is just a part of the renewal process. It's selfish to want to hang around when your time is up.

It's humanity as a whole that matters, not our individual selfish desire to live forever. For humanity to live on forever we need renewal. For there to be renewal, there has to be death.

If that's not meaningful enough, then tough.

Well, just pretend like I was never here, Okay?

 

[Iacchus]

I notice you enjoy symbolism, is it unreasonable for me to assume you not only have an interested in gaining personal knowledge, but also teaching others about this knowledge

So what do you mean by ulterior? ...

 

[Cecil]

The right hemisphere coordinates intelligence, memory, and perception. Flashing a picture of a screwdriver in the left eye (right hemisphere), the right hemisphere could pick out a screwdriver in a box (or a screw if there is one). But by itself, the right hemisphere could not tell you what that object is or how many are in the hand without looking at it.

Incidentally, flashing the image in one eye only works in people who have had their corpus callosum severed (usually as a treatment for epilepsy). Otherwise, the right hemisphere just talks to the left to get the information it needs.

Also, a small minority of people have the functions of their hemispheres reversed. This seems to be more prevalent in left-handed people, though it is by no means a 100% correlation.

 

[Iacchus]

Define our existence? No, I would probably say being actual within reality in the form of matter and natural phenomena defines our existence.

The right hemisphere coordinates intelligence, memory, and perception. Flashing a picture of a screwdriver in the left eye (right hemisphere), the right hemisphere could pick out a screwdriver in a box (or a screw if there is one). But by itself, the right hemisphere could not tell you what that object is or how many are in the hand without looking at it.

Yes, it's our perception that defines our existence.

The left hemisphere is the side of the brain where all the nifty speech and numerical cognitive functions are located.

Each side of the brain has its own set of tasks, they communicate with one another through a junction of about 300 million nerve fibers between the two hemispheres of the brain called the Corpus Callosum. The Corpus Callosum works to tune the independent "minds" in each hemisphere of the brain into one single unified "you".

Do you know what's funny is that my brain is fully capable of fucntioning properly without understanding such things? So what's your point?

Ah, the personal knowledge conundrum.

More wisdom by G. E. Moore:

In his second verse of his essay "A Defense of Commonsense", he argues that there is a distinction between mental facts and physical facts. He says there is no good reason to hold, as many philosophers of his time did, that every physical fact is logically dependent on mental facts, or that every physical fact is causally dependent on mental facts. An example of a physical fact is "The mantlepiece is at present nearer to this body than that bookcase is." Mental facts include "I am conscious now" and "I am seeing something now."

Yes, but what does the physical fact "mean" without the perception of it? If not perceived properly, you can be in for a lot of trouble! ...

Personal knowledge will only get you as far as immediate inner-sensations, it wont be of much help in determining anything about a soul if one exists.

And yet personal knowledge is all about who you are, which "is" your soul. Now you seem to be suggesting that our personal experience is not all it's cracked up to be and, that we should hold our privacy in little regard? It sounds a bit reminiscent of Big Brother if you ask me.

Ah yes, "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind." - Ralph Waldo Emerson.

 

[Humphreys]

Re: Re: 140th & 141st Posts in Thread

Hi lacchus.

And, since Humphreys never got back to me -- hmm ... maybe the number 140 signifies the "soul's quest" for meaning?

I think that's exactly what 140 signifies!

Did you ever notice:

l=12
a=1
c=(3)
c=(3)
h=(8)
u=21
s=19

12+1+3+3+8+21+19=67

(67*(2))=134

134+6=140

Coincidence?

 

[Iacchus]

Hi lacchus.

I think that's exactly what 140 signifies!

Did you ever notice:

l=12
a=1
c=(3)
c=(3)
h=(8)
u=21
s=19

12+1+3+3+8+21+19=67

(67*(2))=134

134+6=140

Coincidence?

Nice try! The only problem is you messed up with the "I," it's the 9th letter not the 12th.

 

[Yahweh]

So what do you mean by ulterior? ...

Intentions inferred beyond the immediate words.

 

[Yahweh]

Yes, it's our perception that defines our existence.

Perceptions defines our sensations and experiences. You need to exist before you can percieve, otherwise no mechanisms exist for coodinate this perception.

Do you know what's funny is that my brain is fully capable of fucntioning properly without understanding such things? So what's your point?

I am explaining how the brain works, demonstrating that the existence of a "soul" is completely unnecessary without its function. You made a specific comment about the right hemisphere of the brain, I decided to extrapolate the comment. Who doesnt appreciate a good sliver of knowledge

Yes, but what does the physical fact "mean" without the perception of it? If not perceived properly, you can be in for a lot of trouble! ...

The physical fact does not have any inherent meaning, it is meaning-neutral.

Humans attach meaning to objects (usually without intention of doing so). There are quite a few things which have (human-defined) meaning that exist in purely the abstract form (such as concepts of "good" and "bad", numbers, pi, F=ma, language, etc.).

And yet personal knowledge is all about who you are, which "is" your soul.

So the "soul" is nothing more than personal knowledge of identity?

Now you seem to be suggesting that our personal experience is not all it's cracked up to be and, that we should hold our privacy in little regard? It sounds a bit reminiscent of Big Brother if you ask me.

Hmmm, I'm not exactly sure how you got that out of what I had written, I value privacy above most other desires.

Ah yes, "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind." - Ralph Waldo Emerson.

Yes, I value integrity very much. There is just something about "belief in false things" (otherwise called "lying to yourself"), which is simply unappealing, therefore while I will not agree with Emerson on his transcendentalist Philosophy, I'll agree with him wholeheartedly on his above comment .

 

[Iacchus]

So what is it the mask of God has finally been removed, only to find out that He is a She? ...

Perceptions defines our sensations and experiences. You need to exist before you can percieve, otherwise no mechanisms exist for coodinate this perception.

And yet the reality of a blind person is far more different then that of a person who has the full capacity to see.

I am explaining how the brain works, demonstrating that the existence of a "soul" is completely unnecessary without its function. You made a specific comment about the right hemisphere of the brain, I decided to extrapolate the comment. Who doesnt appreciate a good sliver of knowledge

And yet I would suggest to you that the brain is running on auto-pilot -- which, in fact is the only thing it's capable of doing. So what I would like to know is who is at the controls, i.e., consciously?

The physical fact does not have any inherent meaning, it is meaning-neutral.

Humans attach meaning to objects (usually without intention of doing so). There are quite a few things which have (human-defined) meaning that exist in purely the abstract form (such as concepts of "good" and "bad", numbers, pi, F=ma, language, etc.).

But meaning determines what we do with the physcial facts, which is why meaning takes precedence.

So the "soul" is nothing more than personal knowledge of identity?

No, the soul is your identity, this is why personal knowledge pertains to your soul.

Hmmm, I'm not exactly sure how you got that out of what I had written, I value privacy above most other desires.

Because the whole notion behind Big Brother is basically science without a soul ... in that it tends to dissect the human factor out of it.

Yes, I value integrity very much. There is just something about "belief in false things" (otherwise called "lying to yourself"), which is simply unappealing, therefore while I will not agree with Emerson on his transcendentalist Philosophy, I'll agree with him wholeheartedly on his above comment .

In other words you're willing to accept the effect, but not the cause. That would be very human of you ... and selfish too.