4 ms·

"Can billions of dollars’ worth of high-tech research succeed in making death optional?" No, because you were never alive in the first place. Well not that in t

"Can billions of dollars’ worth of high-tech research succeed in making death optional?" No, because you were never alive in the first place. Well not that in the way you thought you were. Insert Alan Watts quote.

jodrellblank 10y ago
I have a tough time seeing that worldview as anything much different from solipsism ("it's my brain which creates the world as much as the world creates me, it's you who makes the sun bright, it's you who makes the sky blue, it's you who makes rocks heavy - so you can't say anything objective about anything") and nihilism ("everything is subjective and relative, nothing matters, not joy, not torture") and fatalism ("you can't change yourself to be better, because you don't know what better is, and the you which is supposed to do the changing doesn't exist either"). As he says, you start learning that you are one with everything, because you don't realise that you always were one with everything and can never have become separated from it. A skillful person operates on two levels simultaneously. And then he enlightenedly cheated on his wife, married again twice, and drank himself to death. (Which is not to ad-hom his position, but to point out that for all his studying and meditation, he doesn't seem to have had all the answers) Well we do have a label of what death is, and we might have a chance of changing it, and if we prefer that, what does it help to say "you weren't alive"?
- bamboozled 10y ago
  Ok, the OPs post wasn't fantastic, but I have to be honest, the logic you're applying here is a little confusing. If I understand you correctly, you're point is Alan studied Zen Buddhism but didn't take it as the gospel, therefore the original teachings are false. Which doesn't really seem correct to me I'm by no means an Alan Watts fan, it just seemed like strange reasoning.
  - jodrellblank 10y ago
    My main point was: Alan Watts explicitly said that concepts don't go away once you realise they exist in your head not in the world, and concepts are useful - 'skill' is being able to see both interpretations simultaneously. Well we have concepts of life and death. The parent post saying "you can't put off death if you were never alive" is like saying "you can't take colour photos after you realise the colours exist only in your heads". But you can. It sounds connected, but it's unconnected, it's crossing over two worldviews in one sentence. In one worldview you are alive and can die and can apply medical intervention to try and live longer, in the other view a rippling part of the universe that you call 'medical intervention' connects with a rippling part of the universe that feels like 'you' and the consequence is that the ripple ripples for longer. And it's .. the same thing. You can't really use that view to argue that it can't happen, or that it shouldn't happen. (Intermixed with meanderings about how that worldview seems pretty dismal in some respects, and I don't really get it).
    - andrewfromx 10y ago
      Watts also said you are the Big Bang. Think of an ink bottle thrown at the wall and BOOM ink goes in every direction on the wall, and the tiny little bits of ink at the ends are us. We are the Big Bang, and before it went boom it was 1 solid object. That's the "real you" that can never die. And the illusion you have for 100 years is that you are this separate create called a human with the name John Smith etc etc. but it's all intentional amnesia by the real you. Because, try this, it's absolutely impossible to surprise yourself. You can't sneak up on yourself and go boo and actually be surprised. You need someone else. So, just for fun, the real you broke into different selves. And once you realize this (satori) you laugh and laugh and relax and enjoy the ride to "death" which really isn't death. Therefore drinking lots of alcohol and bringing on this death quicker isn't disallowed. Or 2nd wives or any other sin you want to name.
      - omarchowdhury 10y ago
        That's quite a leap, to go from finite to infinite. Or, it's not even a leap but more of an engulfing. It is not so easy and I don't think death alone is sufficient for revealing the mystery. But perhaps we can be on a trajectory to that revelation, analogous to how the entire universe is on a trajectory to its eventual collapse. The method is at the heart of religion.

jodrellblank 10y ago

I have a tough time seeing that worldview as anything much different from solipsism ("it's my brain which creates the world as much as the world creates me, it's you who makes the sun bright, it's you who makes the sky blue, it's you who makes rocks heavy - so you can't say anything objective about anything") and nihilism ("everything is subjective and relative, nothing matters, not joy, not torture") and fatalism ("you can't change yourself to be better, because you don't know what better is, and the you which is supposed to do the changing doesn't exist either"). As he says, you start learning that you are one with everything, because you don't realise that you always were one with everything and can never have become separated from it. A skillful person operates on two levels simultaneously. And then he enlightenedly cheated on his wife, married again twice, and drank himself to death. (Which is not to ad-hom his position, but to point out that for all his studying and meditation, he doesn't seem to have had all the answers) Well we do have a label of what death is, and we might have a chance of changing it, and if we prefer that, what does it help to say "you weren't alive"?

bamboozled 10y ago
Ok, the OPs post wasn't fantastic, but I have to be honest, the logic you're applying here is a little confusing. If I understand you correctly, you're point is Alan studied Zen Buddhism but didn't take it as the gospel, therefore the original teachings are false. Which doesn't really seem correct to me I'm by no means an Alan Watts fan, it just seemed like strange reasoning.
- jodrellblank 10y ago
  My main point was: Alan Watts explicitly said that concepts don't go away once you realise they exist in your head not in the world, and concepts are useful - 'skill' is being able to see both interpretations simultaneously. Well we have concepts of life and death. The parent post saying "you can't put off death if you were never alive" is like saying "you can't take colour photos after you realise the colours exist only in your heads". But you can. It sounds connected, but it's unconnected, it's crossing over two worldviews in one sentence. In one worldview you are alive and can die and can apply medical intervention to try and live longer, in the other view a rippling part of the universe that you call 'medical intervention' connects with a rippling part of the universe that feels like 'you' and the consequence is that the ripple ripples for longer. And it's .. the same thing. You can't really use that view to argue that it can't happen, or that it shouldn't happen. (Intermixed with meanderings about how that worldview seems pretty dismal in some respects, and I don't really get it).
  - andrewfromx 10y ago
    Watts also said you are the Big Bang. Think of an ink bottle thrown at the wall and BOOM ink goes in every direction on the wall, and the tiny little bits of ink at the ends are us. We are the Big Bang, and before it went boom it was 1 solid object. That's the "real you" that can never die. And the illusion you have for 100 years is that you are this separate create called a human with the name John Smith etc etc. but it's all intentional amnesia by the real you. Because, try this, it's absolutely impossible to surprise yourself. You can't sneak up on yourself and go boo and actually be surprised. You need someone else. So, just for fun, the real you broke into different selves. And once you realize this (satori) you laugh and laugh and relax and enjoy the ride to "death" which really isn't death. Therefore drinking lots of alcohol and bringing on this death quicker isn't disallowed. Or 2nd wives or any other sin you want to name.
    - omarchowdhury 10y ago
      That's quite a leap, to go from finite to infinite. Or, it's not even a leap but more of an engulfing. It is not so easy and I don't think death alone is sufficient for revealing the mystery. But perhaps we can be on a trajectory to that revelation, analogous to how the entire universe is on a trajectory to its eventual collapse. The method is at the heart of religion.