On 2005-03-14 11:55:29 -0800, "puma" <puma@dowse.com> said:

> Dear Stu,
>
> If we persons can not leave the arguments of others,we can not reach
> any point at all.My argument belongs to myself. Neither it belongs to
> ARISTO nor to any other big-shot! Please first of all, try to
> understand this simple fact.
>
> I do not like to hide myself behind others` thoughts..

Mr. Puma Sir,

I am not suggesting that you are hiding behind other's thoughts.  You
are however writing posts on subjects already discussed profoundly
starting with Aristotle.  There is a reason his writings survived some
2300 years.  You will be surprised how many philosophical points made
by the ancient Greeks are relevant to todays way of life.

You will also find more recently a fairly lengthy discussion of the
issues of material reality and common sense philosophy in the writings
Hume, Paine,  Thoreau to name a few.

Instead of thinking you are hiding behind others thoughts you may enjoy
reading those with similar thoughts to see how they argued with pie in
the sky idealists like myself.
--
~Stu

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

Stu wrote:
> On 2005-03-14 11:55:29 -0800, "puma" <puma@dowse.com> said:
> 
reach[vbcol=seagreen] 
to[vbcol=seagreen] 
>
> Mr. Puma Sir,
>
> I am not suggesting that you are hiding behind other's thoughts.  You

> are however writing posts on subjects already discussed profoundly
> starting with Aristotle.  There is a reason his writings survived
some
> 2300 years.  You will be surprised how many philosophical points made

> by the ancient Greeks are relevant to todays way of life.
>
> You will also find more recently a fairly lengthy discussion of the
> issues of material reality and common sense philosophy in the
writings
> Hume, Paine,  Thoreau to name a few.
>
> Instead of thinking you are hiding behind others thoughts you may
enjoy
> reading those with similar thoughts to see how they argued with pie
in
> the sky idealists like myself.
> --
> ~Stu

Mr.Stu Sir:



I see your point. And understand you have read many ancient big shots
too.

But for me, that does not help us.If we ourselves can solve any problem
now, that is good. Showing to know much, or trying to pump into big
words,
means nothing for me and for others..

And one more thing though,it is not necessary to make love in order to
make a baby, as you know without spending any energy babies are coming
into life on these days.. It is very eas,it only takes several
thounsand DOLLARS to spend on it dear..Remember this!!!


With compassion,

Puma

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

On 2005-03-16 04:32:44 -0800, "puma" <puma@dowse.com> said:

>
> Mr.Stu Sir:
>
>
>
> I see your point. And understand you have read many ancient big shots
> too.

I have been reading your posts Puma.  I consider you a big shot.
Always thinking about things.  A true philosopher, a lover of wisdom.

>
> But for me, that does not help us.If we ourselves can solve any problem
> now, that is good. Showing to know much, or trying to pump into big
> words,
> means nothing for me and for others..

Nobody is "pumping into big words".  I was expressing the fact that the
problem you challenged us with in this thread has been discussed
before.  You are not alone.  Greater minds than yours of mine have
wrestled with these issues concerning the nature of time and space.

You have a choice, you can remain ignorant of the great philosophers
before us or you can pursue their achievements and enjoy the fruits of
their wisdom.

Even this argument you make about "we ourselves can solve any problem"
is discussed at length by the existentialists starting with Kierkegaard
in the mid 1800's.  These radical thinkers argued about the importance
of finding a subjective truth by looking inward as a contrast to
objective scientific truth held so high by the society.

Should we choose to ignore Kierkegaard?  Or is it possible that he may
be on to something - that that his philosophical advice is relevant to
our lives?

>
> And one more thing though,it is not necessary to make love in order to
> make a baby, as you know without spending any energy babies are coming
> into life on these days.. It is very eas,it only takes several
> thounsand DOLLARS to spend on it dear..Remember this!!!

I have a 13 year old boy.  When he is ready to leave home I am hoping
to submit to him a bill for every expense he has garnered from diapers
to university texts.
;-)
>
>
> With compassion,
>
> Puma

Namasté
--
~Stu

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

Stu wrote:
> On 2005-03-16 04:32:44 -0800, "puma" <puma@dowse.com> said:
> 
shots[vbcol=seagreen] 
>
> I have been reading your posts Puma.  I consider you a big shot.
> Always thinking about things.  A true philosopher, a lover of wisdom.
> 
problem[vbcol=seagreen] 
>
> Nobody is "pumping into big words".  I was expressing the fact that
the
> problem you challenged us with in this thread has been discussed
> before.  You are not alone.  Greater minds than yours of mine have
> wrestled with these issues concerning the nature of time and space.

Hi Stu:


Thanks for your kind words.``If there is no movement``,for me it is
pumping into big words, ``if everything in life are illusions `` for me
it is pumping into big words..

There is no problem regarding TIME as it is already solved..As we use
it anyway,we are on time for our appointments. We move from one place
to another within a certain time.. So argument has brough about by
some new age people. And I just wanted to tell them what we are using
right now and no body wants to change it..That is so simple,it has no
relation regarding
any challenge or philosophy at all.


However I certainly would like to thank you for your nice allogorism..


With compassion,

Puma
>
> You have a choice, you can remain ignorant of the great philosophers
> before us or you can pursue their achievements and enjoy the fruits
of
> their wisdom.
>
> Even this argument you make about "we ourselves can solve any
problem"
> is discussed at length by the existentialists starting with
Kierkegaard
> in the mid 1800's.  These radical thinkers argued about the
importance
> of finding a subjective truth by looking inward as a contrast to
> objective scientific truth held so high by the society.
>
> Should we choose to ignore Kierkegaard?  Or is it possible that he
may
> be on to something - that that his philosophical advice is relevant
to
> our lives?
> 
to[vbcol=seagreen] 
coming[vbcol=seagreen] 
>
> I have a 13 year old boy.  When he is ready to leave home I am hoping

> to submit to him a bill for every expense he has garnered from
diapers
> to university texts.
> ;-) 
>=20
> Namast=E9
> --=20
> ~Stu

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]