4 Answers

  1. Great question. I just wanted to invite you to our ontological debate next Saturday.


    In the logic that you have presented, depersonalization is really an inevitable result of the consistent development of thought; naturally, if the thinker does not limit himself to thought itself (but lives it like a true philosopher).

    However, it does not follow that this is a finite result.

    Understanding that I am not a separate entity from reality and other people does not mean that I do not exist at all. The rejection of the” I-concept ” does not destroy reality.

    If we talk about the Tao:

    The One has no parts: the “I” is not, the” I ” is an illusion; moreover, any definition of the Tao is illusory; however, the Tao itself is not anything, including an illusion.

    If I don't identify with my body or soul, this is not the end of the road, but only the beginning =))

  2. one of the responses included —

    However, it does not follow that this is a finite result.

    and this is the correct answer )).. the fact is that you, tracing the degradation of personality, as the philosophical dogma develops, do not realize the fact that you are moving in a circle.

    as soon as you ACTUALLY reach your “final” destination, you will find that you are unbearably eager to go further, and by a happy coincidence, the road leads there.

    after making a couple of circles, you can understand that the movement is circular, and begin to look for other reasons and raise new philosophical questions that are not related to the “forward”movement.

    Solipsism is often seen here as a dead-end worldview station .. but even he is so visible only from the side .. you can't argue against it without being there, and there are no problems at all.. you can see everything perfectly from that bell tower.

    “a thing brought to perfection turns into its opposite” (Chinese phrase about Yang-Yin)..

    to achieve depersonalization, you need to have personalization, and this fact does not give a chance for depersonalization. .. it's a circular motion.

    However, it does not follow that this is a finite result.

    1. First, an instant rebuttal, i.e. the answer is “Of course not” ))

    So – a person who does not know what a soul is at all, and even more so what an eternal soul is, who has not met this term in the process of life, and even more so has not met the Exact Scientific definition of this ridiculous “soul”, can safely live without problems and without depersonalization.

    1. This is confirmed by the fact that all ancient people lived quietly and built a civilization. Not states with a slavish single religion and the idea of an eternal soul (for the sake of the posthumous future of which you have to endure the shit of the real world, and religions and the “soul” have no other goals and can not be) and the cultivation of cereals, the domestication of animals, i.e. rational “pre-scientific” behavior, observations, the accumulation of objective Knowledge (verified and repeated regardless of the individual).
    2. Moreover, all modern people also live well, and do not even know anything about the soul )) The author and commentators certainly write these letters, refer to the fairy tales of philosophers, to the semi-religious ideas of “teachers” who tell beautiful stories, but NO ONE has ever given a DEFINITION of THE SOUL.

    The term ” soul “is used by me in the literal sense without metaphors, as well as other terms except for the letters” soul ” which do not make sense but are used in the question. Knowledge is only exclusively Working theories of the Scientific Method of Cognition of the real world, which give one hundred percent predictive power (repeatability, verifiability, independence from the experimenter's personality) in the field of application.

    The rest is not knowledge but memorized fairy tales

    1. And these words about thatNO ONE knows the definition of “eternal soul” is also easy to check – because no one will give a definition now)) giggles.

    2. To exclude chatter, let me immediately remind you that there is a BASIC axiom of communication-adequacy-legal capacity. It says that “terms and definitions in communication should be unambiguous”, well, this is obvious, otherwise there is no point in discussion and all these questions and answers.

    I give a hundred percent forecast (the scientific method of cognition and logic allow you to make such predictive actions, unlike philosophy and other delusional unscientific FALSE research) as for the unambiguous definition of the Soul, and especially the Eternal Soul, there will not even be close.

    1. Also, there will be no unambiguous definition of the subject that philosophy “explores”, there will be no unambiguous definition of suffering, wholeness, immutability (I wonder what is an unchanging soul in dementia or depersonalization?), non-routine, tao, “I-concept”, etc.

    That is, the entire discussion on the topic is completely devoid of a semantic component and characterizes only the personalities of the questioners and responders.

    1. For the youngest, I will also remind you of the Basic Axiom of the Scientific Method- “true ideas about the real world are consistent.” Taking into account the principle of Unambiguity, immediately there is a knowability of the world, the possibility of Logical proof and the use of reasoning discussions-theories for real life.

    Well, immediately throw out fairy tales about Santa Claus, Cheburashka, Baba Yaga, the Devil, God, the Soul, etc.

    Greetings to the humanitarian illogical storytellers of emotions from rationalists! helped than I could ))

  3. I'll answer right away: no. it is not.

    In general, I would like to answer like this (I assure you that I answer your question seriously and with respect):

    Oh! God…

    if everything is interpreted in the language of philosophers, then there will be no place for a vulnerable soul… although… judging by the question, you don't give her any space anyway…

    you don't believe me, then?

    and you don't have to…

    first, learn how to create your own reality.

    Do you know how to manage the weather? have you tried it?

    You know how to create events (let's take the minimum amount: you know that you are going to have a conversation/interview with a stranger or unpleasant person. You can plan in advance/set the tone of a conversation with someone who doesn't know you/understands you and take the conversation to where you need to go)?

    just take your mind off speculations and start interacting with life in some way.

    As soon as you have at least something to do, all thinking will disappear by itself.


    There are mines..-)

Leave a Reply