But let us return to the original topic. We are filling in where the idea of progress, right?
La Hula: We have just reached a consensus on this point, and that is: the gradual evolution of human progress is to accept the fact. You said, In biology, the human point of view as the truth of this, and this point in the field of biology can be verified, so they applied the same theory in psychology. We agree that this is the human view.
g: This opinion is truth? In biology, I have accepted the progress of mankind has said, and has been gradually transferred to the psychological level this argument. So, this view is the truth?
La Hula: I challenge you now understand the problem. I do not think it is the truth.
g: So, I gave up the practice of the concept.
La Hula: give it up no problem, as long as you give it on the line in the consciousness of the ... ...
g: No, sir, please. I saw the actions of human beings, that is, from a biological aspect to the psychological aspects of migration, in this process, the invention of the notion that you will eventually see God or be inspired to reach the Brahmins or any class , nirvana, heaven or hell. If you are really seeing the truth, not theory, that this is the end.
La Hula: Absolutely right, this is what I have always been described.
g: Why should I get the psychological knowledge of Scripture, or this or that?
Rahul pull: There is no reason.
g: then why did I study the Buddha?
La Hula: I said, we are limited by.
Boom: Can I ask a question: Do you accept that he is to be limited it?
g: Dr. Boom Q: We have to accept that he is to be limited up?
La Hula: I do not know if you accept this idea, but I received at the time of reincarnation is to be limited.
DB: ah, I want to say is: I think at least in our part of the discussion, the Krishna Ji said he would not be limited to the beginning,UGG bailey button, so there is some different from the insight into the power of ordinary people. Fair to say?
G: Please! Not to mention me, I may be biological strange Yi, please do not involve me into it. Sir, we wish to discuss is: Can we recognize that no progress in the psychological truth? Is the truth, rather than this idea. Do you know?
La Hula: I understand.
g: is the truth, not the Therefore, as human beings we are, what we do is see the truth or false?
Rahul pull: Do you mean the general human?
G: the world.
La Hula: No, most people can not see.
g: So when you tell people more access to knowledge, read it, read it, study scriptures, study the Buddha said, Christ said, whether there is more, it has accumulated such a body from top to bottom will help them leap into heaven instinct.
DB: We say we are being limited, however, say this, how do we know what we are being limited? This is what I really want to say.
g: Yes, sir, his point is that all human beings are to be limited up?
DB: I want to emphasize is, if we say we are to be confined to and may produce two reactions. One possibility is related to the cumulative knowledge of the situation with the limited, we observed that the common human experience, we can view it, and recognize that people often are limited, and the other a response could be that we are in a more Direct observation of the way we are being limited? This is what I strive to achieve.
g: help on this matter, but it? I mean, could react, it may no response.
DB: I want to emphasize is, if we say we are being limited, that I think apart from a practice or progressive in some ways, it is nothing else to do. In other words, you are in the beginning by the limitations of the state.
g: Not necessarily, I do not think so.
DB: ah! Let us continue to explore this topic! The meaning of his question is: if we all start to be limited to ... ...
g ... ...: We, indeed, been limited by.
Boom ... ...: What we can do next?
Rahul pull: no next step.
DB: no matter what we do, how we can be limited from this state of liberation?
La Hula: limitations of the state from being observed in the free will.
DB: Oh! still the same problem, how do we observe?
La Hula: Of course, many people tried many methods.
g: No, not many methods. When it comes to you [method], it has been confined to a [method] on the people.
La Hula: I just it means. And you are also limited by your conversation, your words have been confined in a state of mind not to be limited to an attempt to actually limit the mind is.
g: No, I doubt that argument, whether Clinton is now talking about the limitations of the mind - because the mind is the brain, that is, thoughts, feelings, is the existence of the state of human psychology. I doubt this point. Let me mention a proposal, we have from the title.
La Hula: The question is how to observe, right?
g: No, sir, is wrong. Not [to], this is not how the problem. First, let us observe this simple fact: I am being human, is what I on behalf of all mankind, I am personally, I on behalf of all mankind, right?
Shiluogeer: the individual's point of view is the case.
g: no, as human beings, on behalf of you, on behalf of the whole world, because I suffer, I experienced great pain and so on, every human is always the same, so I am being human is not observe the same attitude towards the human dimension to the psychological from the biological level of hypocrisy? indeed human progress in the biological, from small to large, from the wheel to the jet. As humans, I was not seeing progress in the course of human-made disasters? I is not seen in this process, the same as I see this table? Or I said: [Yes, I accept this theory, this idea. And this theory, this concept, it becomes knowledge.
Shiluogeer: If I see this phenomenon as I saw this table and the same, that it is no longer a theory.
g: then it becomes a reality. But once you leave the truth, it becomes a concept, the pursuit of knowledge and such. You farther from the truth. I do not know if I'm understand you had.
La Hula: Yes, I think it is.
grams: how to do? The fact that humans left?
La Hula: humanity is stuck in this rut where.
g: Yes, this is a fact, is not it? from tree to tree, from infancy to childhood, the adolescent period, indeed there is progress in biology. Now that we have this attitude, the fact that, transfer to the field of psychology, and we found some progress in psychology, this is really the wrong move. I understand you do not know is not a?
DB: You mean this is a part of you confined?
G: No, now limited to first put aside. I do not want to enter that topic. But why the growth of the biological fact that the field of applied psychology, and why? This is a fact that we face, but why do we do?
Shiluogeer: I want to [become] something.
g: that is, you want to meet, security, identification, sense of accomplishment.
Shiluogeer: these goals are not met.
g: So why do human beings do not actually look at what you do, do not just guess out of thin air?
Shiluogeer: an ordinary person do?
g: you, me, person A, person B.
Shiluogeer: I do not like to see, I'm afraid of the truth.
g: So you live in the illusion.
Shiluogeer: Of course.
g: Why?
Shiluogeer: I want to be something I both fear and do not want to see. This is the differences.
g: No, ma'am, as long as you can see for yourself by listening to, sooner or later.
Shiluogeer: But the fact is, I usually see.
g: Why do you not see?
Shiluogeer: I fear and doubt. I do not know why.
grams: When you talk about fear, you are entering a very different areas. I just want to ask why people do this game for thousands of years? Why live in such a structure in the wrong, and people then said, to selfless, to be so, should it be done? Why?
Shiluogeer: We all have a very rational side.
g: I question it all. We are not living together with the facts, but with ideas and knowledge to live together.
La Hula: Exactly.
grams: The fact is, in some evolutionary biology,UGG boots, but not psychologically. So we put the knowledge, concepts, theory, philosophy and other such things are so important.
La Hula: a psychological, not a bit you may have seen some development, some kind of evolution?
g: no.
La Hula: But give another lie, and steal, do evil things to do is repeat it! you can explain to him some very basic reason, then the traditional standards, he changed , you become a better person, no stealing, no lying, one think of murder.
g: for example terrorists.
Rahul pull: like that may change.
g: Sir, you say, a bad to the terrorists around the world as
La Hula: Do not you think you can act bad to the point of a criminal, to explain his behavior is wrong with it? Because he understood what you said, either because of his own reflection, or because of your personal influence or other factors, he transformed himself, he changed.
g: Sir, I'm not sure if you can orthodox manner and in such a criminal conversation.
La Hula: This I do not know.
g: Do you know, you can make criminals calm, give him a reward and so on. But a true inner evil criminals, will seriously allow He Xinzhi sound then? So-called terrorist, he will listen to you? Will listen to your remarks sound mind then? Of course not.
Rahul pull: you can not say, I do not know. I'm not entirely sure this view, but I have no more evidence to support my argument.
g: I have no proof, but you can see the current situation
La Hula: The current situation is that there are terrorists, but we do not know is not one of them has to transform itself into a good man. We do not have evidence.
g: This is what I want to focus the discussion - wicked good man evolved.
La Hula: in general, and the traditional point of view, which of course will happen, you can not deny this.
g: Yes, we know that we have many examples.
La Hula: Should we did not fully accept that?
g: Yes, please wait a minute, sir, a liar, cruel, bad thing to do to make the wicked, and perhaps one day he learned that he's evil, and then said: . but this is not good. is not good from the bad.
La Hula: Of course not.
g: so-called . is not good against evil.
La Hula: The point of view this is the case.
g: Any views are the same.
La Hula: I do not agree.
Narayan: We might say that (traditional) point of view, the wicked into the righteous. I think we can call it (the psychological progress). This is our doing something, which is the human mind.
g: Of course, you're wearing yellow clothes, I wore a brown suit, we have night and day, men and women who so opposed to things But the so-called fear of the opposition it? do good against the so-called? love against hate it? so-called opposition, which means duality.
La Hula: I would say we are the second per term conversations.
grams: All languages are binary.
La Hula: missing binary channel, you could not speak, I have failed him .
g: Yes, for comparison, it is. But I'm not saying this.
La Hula: Currently you are talking about is absolute, final ... ... When we talk about good and evil, we are talking to the dual approach.
g: This is what I do not want to talk about this problem. has never been good against evil. So when we say: I want to move, to change much from the original limitations of the bad situation, much change to transcend the limitations of this case,bailey UGG boots, it is okay? Therefore, it was not always free. Comes from the kind of freedom is highly limited, because I'm stuck in this cell, and I want to be free, freedom is not this a reaction between the cells.
La Hula: I do not understand.
g: Sir, can we think about: love against hate it?
La Hula: can only say: Where there is love there is no hate.
g: No, I'm not asking that. My question is: hate is the opposite of love? If yes, then there is hate in this love, because love is born from the hate is from the opposite side of that generated, all of the people opposed to things are from the opposite side with their produce. Do not you?
La Hula: I do not know. This is your argument.
g: Sir, but it is a fact, I'm afraid, so I develop the courage, you know the purpose behind the fear. I drink, or do something else, and so the aim of lifting the fear in my heart. In the end, I said he is very brave. All non-war hero and thus won the medal heroes. Because they are afraid, they said:
g: I mean is that any person resulting from its opposite things, includes the opposed side.
Rahul pull: how to say?
g: President , if someone hates you, and then the man said: the opposition, so that the opposition include this.
La Hula: I do not know whether it is opposed to both.
g: This is our way of life, sir. This is what we do. I'm sexy, I can not sexy; I swear hold celibacy - not me - is that people swear hold celibacy, this is the opposite. so people are always stuck in this channel in the opposite I question the whole passage, I think it does not exist: we invented this channel, but in fact, it does not exist. I mean, please see this as an explanation like, do not take anything, President.
Shiluogeer: Personally, I put the channel as opposed to an operating assumption of a human factor, and we are trapped inside.
g : Oh, no, this is not a human factor. It's like saying: (I used to be a tribe, and now I have become a country,Discount UGG boots, then in the end, I will become international.) However, tribal system still is practiced.
DB: I think the two are that in some ways, we do progress, in these areas, we are not brutal as before.
Shiluogeer: This is what I call human factors as a result.
g: I doubt this is not human.
DB: You mean not really progress? you can see, in general, people in the past brutal than many people now, so, do you mean it actually does not make much sense?
g: we still barbaric.
DB: Yes, we are very brutal, but it said that we are not as used to be brutal.
No comments:
Post a Comment