The shout... then, an "Echo'...?

[Dadoo]

Humans Only Please:

As a human, I wish to discuss this ONLY with other humans.
(in the interest of reasonable debate)

Who can differentiate between a shout and an echo?

Who can shout the answer and not be mocked by their own ears?

Every chicken comes home to roost.

Every action has an echo.

Who will stand up and shout into this virtual chasm the answer?

Will you hear the answer twice?

Aye. You will.

Silence, too has echo, my dears.

And silence is never a wrong answer.

What is the difference between a shout and an echo?

You? And you? YOU?!

Dadoo

[jeffl]

Quote by: Dadoo Every action has an echo.

I call it 'teleological tennis;' i think it has to do with interfaces (walls), reflection, refraction, distance, and velocity of propigation. Thinking, praxis, is teleological tennis between world view and sense perception.

What is the difference between a shout and an echo?

The agent.

[Prometheus]

Dadoo. I think I have caught on to these confusing posts in the philosophy section. At first I thought I was just dumb (it's my default assumption), but now I'm pretty sure you guys don't know what the hell you're talking about either.

[Dadoo]

Welcome, then,
Dear Prometheus
into the cult of "fool".

Only that which is decipherable will be understood.
Some, to that effect, choose to cipher.
Others, choose to understand.

Relativity, my brother means we can never disagree. You disagree with my mind and thus we are the same. So, where is One fault to find, with neither left to blame?

I am fading quickly, sir, from authoritarian scholasticism into thorough enjoyment and a loose grasp of the mystery itself.
This post, to decipher (*wink)
is a play of words about the question/ answer conundrum.
A question is a statement. It states an unknowing or a self-perception of unknowing.
The answer is but a version of the question, as it addresses the phenomena at hand, equally.
You stand between the echo and the shout, one delivered, one received. Before the shout was ushered forth, there was silence. After, silence still. In that the question and answer cancel each other as in an input/output algorithm, the silence was essentially unbroken. (It lay beneath, undisturbed as it were)
There is always more. You stated a truth that I have chosen to ellaborate upon as if it were a question.
Before shouting, I recommend that you expect an equal and opposite echo, as the parameters of the chasm before you define how loud you must yell and how clear the echo will be in return.
Does a question exist?
Not until asked?
Not until conceived? And from what is it borne of?
It's answer, of course.
The silence between an echo and a shout is your true self. Peaceful.
Knowing. Smiling. Frowning.

I only plant seeds in furrowed brows
I furrow brows as I please.


Much
Dadoo
-about nothing.

[Prometheus]

Will someone tell me wheather he's just hi, or wheather I just got my ass handed to me but am too stupid to know it?

[Dadoo]

Prometheus-
Life Rocks,
I'm in the band.
If the music sucks...
I don't wish to bother you!

On the Conun-Drums...
Dadoo!!

[jeffl]

Quote by: Prometheus ...but now I'm pretty sure you guys don't know what the hell you're talking about either.

I began my spiritual search when i was 24; i am now 42. I noticed when i started that most people who have anything to say about spirituality, when you think about what they say, are actually saying nothing. I wasn't going to let that happen to me; i saw it as my responsibility to find and articulate the truth if it was there, no point finding it if i couldn't articulate it. Turns out that articulating it is like defining 'meaning,' it requires abstraction. It also turns out that the way the brain works provides a dialectic framework that is, as i see it, analogous to (or perhaps descriptive of) the way humanity has perceived spiritual Being traditionally.

While Dadoo's questions touched on the notion of free will, they spoke directly to the issue of cause and effect (action and reaction.) Or what? Usually, a perterbation resulting from the action propagates 'outward' from its source, does it? Sorry for my tone, but your post suggests an unwillingness to engage in 'communal abstraction.':) And when that perterbation impinges on another 'thing,' that thing might be stimulated to respond in some 'passive' or 'active' fashion; would you agree? I mean, these things seem rather self-evident to me; based on overt appearances. I'm not saying it's how things are, just how they look. Further, the shout comes from the compulsion, the agent; wouldn't you say?

[eggosphere]

One day ill fly to the moon and find Dadoo standing on the edge of a crater yelling about moon cheese and why nobody took the time to sit around and taste it. And then ill realise it was but an echo i witnessed. Or was it?. Or was it? OR WAS..*brain audible explodes within skull*

[belverron]

Make something flowery if you want to publish it, but don't expect a bestseller. If you're trying to convey an idea, especially a complex one, make it as simple as you can. Then again, if you find happiness in being obscure, be my guest. But I enjoy inspiring epiphany, not confusion.

[Dadoo]

Then, my dear Belveron, here is my current obversation:

"One hears what one wants to hear."

eg.

" if you find happiness in being obscure, be my guest. But I enjoy inspiring epiphany, not confusion."

... epiphanies, but for yourself only. I wish you many.

Confusion is only seen by the confused, my friend. I don't wish to 'inspire' another; I, like you, am inspired, itself! I do not seek happiness anymore. I can't seek what I have found! lol.
I speak to those who understand my 'line' only. The rest can say what they wish. It is an echo, if you will, for this moment. As this post is too only an echo of your last post. If impressions are skewed, we must only look at the expression objectively to come to a clear translation. The burden of which, is wholly yours. If skewed it seems still, then one has not surrendered subjective prejudice. When the point has cleared and 'come home', then the obstacles are removed and reception is no longer burdened with the prejudice of dogmatism; the expected language in the expected modalities.


I see we are very similar in this way. Thank you for your opinion. I can be direct. But you won't believe what I believe, anyway. Not because I told you so. There is only the experiential, in my world.
And isn't poetry nicer? At least we can agree upon what is "obscure" to both of us, 'eh?
Perhaps I publish my works under "poetry", or "comedy"!
Or, right along side the other fools on the shelf.

In any fashion, I totally agree with you.

Dadoo

[Dadoo]

Hi again,
Belv, in your signature, there is an interesting quote which I see as dichotomous in it's possible translation. Based upon your observation that I confuse an issue (implicitly conveyed as intentional), I contest that this is a symptom of my "foolish consistency".

hobgoblin

n 1: (folklore) a small grotesque supernatural creature that makes trouble for human beings [syn: goblin, hob] 2: an object of dread or apprehension.

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds"--Ralph Waldo Emerson [syn: bugbear]

Whose little mind I wonder?
The Fool's, or more likely, the disdainful onlookers?

Clarity?
Impossible.
Epiphany?
Beyond Impossible.

-(IMHO)
Dadoo

P.S.
Eggosphere unborn yet
and gladder I see
for it.
Understanding? Nay!
And gladder for it, We.
The cheese is swiss, by and by
If you look too hard
You will miss the chance
For even Horace blinks the eye.

You are a jewel. I am glad you are on the inside.
Keep them smiling.
Dadoo