A gentle reminder

[Miguel1]

15 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Not really. Doing it reasonably well isn't the same as mastering it. It just means being able to make it real - whether that is done excellently or not is a different matter.

In your own words: ”to actualize it”.

I wonder what is ’mastering something’ then if not to actualized it and to do it really well.

[Leo Gura]

1 minute ago, Jirh said:

I think we can say birds understand flying instinctively or unconsciously, if that makes sense.

No, it does not make sense.

[Jirh]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

No, it does not make sense.

I love you, man! 

[tsuki]

Which birds are the masters of flight? 

[Leo Gura]

2 minutes ago, tsuki said:

Which birds are the masters of flight? 

Kiwis

[Willy Phallicus]

Knowing is overstanding. 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

25 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Kiwis

Sif not penguins !

 

[Leo Gura]

@Natasha Tori Maru Kiwis in honor of the lass from down unda

Gotta keep the Aussie theme going.

Edited 11 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Xonas Pitfall]

Understanding in its purest form is being, unity. You want to understand something so badly that you fully become and immerse yourself in it. Hence, Love = Pure Understanding.

[Leo Gura]

Being is not understanding.

You guys are being sloppy.

[Xonas Pitfall]

@Leo Gura In its purest form, it is!

In more generic layman’s terms: then no, correct.

[Jirh]

Being is definitely one form of understanding (Feminine, instinctive, non-verbal, intuitive, unconscious). The other form is intellect (Masculine, learned, verbal, logical, conscious).

Both forms are valid.

[Inliytened1]

1 hour ago, UnbornTao said:

Not at all. We're using 'understanding' differently. I'm talking about experiential understanding. If you can't "do" it (experience it, actualize it, make it real and not merely conceptual), you don't really 'understand' it. Your inability to actualize it is proof of this disparity, and this feedback points to the existence of this domain of "knowledge" that isn't just "thinking" that you understand something. The latter requires proving it, in a sense, and not just spinning your mental wheels.

I may understand how to remove a car battery by watching a YouTube video and so on paper I understand it but then when I go.perform the actual task I can't turn the.wrench quite right due to.the location of the battery because im not super experienced with the nuances of the wrench in certain weird . positions or have little experience.  Does this mean I dont understand it conceptually though?

Edited 11 hours ago by Inliytened1

[tsuki]

By watching a video, a representation of the action, you understand the video because you created concepts, representations, of what had been done. Thus you may say that you know how to change the battery.

Understanding is demonstrated by changing the battery, by aligning reality with the concepts you have, so that what you have in front of you corresponds with the knowledge you have.

As for the existence of understanding apart from demonstration, it is just conviction, nothing else.

[Breakingthewall]

There are many levels of understanding. For example, you might understand that if you're handsome you'll have more opportunities to get sex than if you're not. This is an understanding. 

but you could also understand that most of the time this will happen because of a validation dynamic rather than genuine attraction, and that the person will choose you because you're desirable to others, therefore their identity status will be elevated, and none of this has anything to do with a good fucking session.

[tsuki]

The whole bird/mastery thread is silly because it tried to discuss understanding without the possibility to create knowledge (as in case of animals).  Understanding is only in relation to something you know/representation.

[Inliytened1]

Here's another example.   I must understand something I have to do and how to do it, but yet I lack the motivation to do it.  This does not mean I don't understand what i have to do or the ramifications that might follow if I dont do it.  Take for example someone addicted to drugs or alcohol.  They may understand addiction, in fact perhaps might be an expert on how it works and the consequences it brings.  And yet when it comes to actualizing the understanding they lack the care or motivation.  And end up dying because they didnt do the action - in this case to stop using.  But their understanding is independent of the action.

[Eskilon]

25 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

Here's another example.   I must understand something I have to do and how to do it, but yet I lack the motivation to do it.  This does not mean I don't understand what i have to do or the ramifications that might follow if I dont do it.  Take for example someone addicted to drugs or alcohol.  They may understand addiction, in fact perhaps might be an expert on how it works and the consequences it brings.  And yet when it comes to actualizing the understanding they lack the care or motivation.  And end up dying because they didnt do the action - in this case to stop using.  But their understanding is independent of the action.

That's true, but there's understanding that's only possible through experience.

An example would be a blind man that never saw light in his life. People around him goes on and on telling him how light is, how it works and so on. But all that doesnt mean anything, all those explanations are rubbish because he can't do a simple action: see light. Same thing with this work, scholars of spirituality or any foundational master doesn't mean they actually understand what the master taught.

Understading in the theoritical might be some kind of understanding, but is certainly a very poor one. You might understand how flying works, but that's not really the case because you were never a bird. The understanding in this case is just in the abstract, which is really poor in my opinion. Without direct experience all understanding is incomplete, no matter how sophisticated it might appear to be.

 

Edited 4 hours ago by Eskilon

[Inliytened1]

10 minutes ago, Eskilon said:

That's true, but there's understanding that's only possible through experience.

An example would be a blind man that never saw light in his life. Ppeople around him goes on and on telling him how light is, how it works and so on. But all that doesnt mean anything, all those explanations are rubbish because he can't do a simple action: see light. Same thing with this work, scholars of spirituality or any foundational master doesn't mean they understand actually understand what the master taught.

Understading in the theoritical might be some kind of understanding, but is certainly a very poor one. You might understand how flying works, but that's not really the case because you were never a bird. The understanding in this case is just in the abstract, which is really poor in my opinion.

 

Yeah that's definitely a good point.  I understand things much better by doing them.  For example if someone trains you on something until you actually do it you don't really get it to the point of mastery.  But is that understanding  or is that more of mastering.  In other words is it all just different degrees of understanding.  To your point you cant fully know what it is to be a bird without being the bird.   A bird if it could talk could explain it to you and you would have a certain level of understanding- but until you actually became the bird you wouldn't fully understand it.  But that's where understanding and Being collapse into one.  That is the most fundamental level.  It is not really knowing it is Being.  

Edited 4 hours ago by Inliytened1

[Eskilon]

8 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

But that's where understanding and Being collapse into one.  That is the most fundamental level.  It is not really knowing it is Being.  

All problems in the world would be solved if we could experience others persons being

Forgiving would be almost a silly thing. If you have lived through the experience of any people who have done wrong to you, you would understand instantly why they have done and there would be no problem at all. 

Edited 3 hours ago by Eskilon