Do Words Hurt?

LesMisanthrope
We can get lost in the woods but we should never blame the forest. We only achieve safety by going around it. But peace is learning to walk through it without fear.

No one can 'learn' to be without fear.
But one can realize that one is the peace amidst the sound and the fury.
One can find the paradise that was lost.

reply to post by Itisnowagain

No one can 'learn' to be without fear.
But one can realize that one is the peace amidst the sound and the fury.
One can find the paradise that was lost.

When one learns the nature of words, he no longer fears them. Paradise is never lost. It is always here.

LesMisanthrope
When one learns the nature of words, he no longer fears them.

And then it can be very tempting to be clever with words - as they can be used as concealed weapons.

reply to post by Itisnowagain

And then it can be very tempting to be clever with words - as they can be used as concealed weapons.

As you've shown. It is always tempting to pull the trigger isn't it?

LesMisanthrope
As you've shown. It is always tempting to pull the trigger isn't it?

But I do not need two guns!!

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


Thanks for illustrating yet again . . . the . . . uhhhh . . . slight degree . . . of awareness and understanding you have about

--words
--brain physiology and function
--linguistics
--psycho-linguistics.

LOL.

Saying that the word "chicken" is not a chicken

is a VERY ABSURD ANALOGY

and quite extremely different from saying that

the "word"

"word"

is not a word.

Sheesh.

This thread gets more absurd by the post.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


Sooooooooo . . . now many

concepts, thoughts,

even images . . .

have you EVER

had, without . . . .

drum roll . . .


words?

reply to post by BO XIAN

the "word"

"word"

is not a word.

Quite a paradox. You're not as superficial as you make yourself out to be. What I meant is—and you might still think this absurd—the word chicken cannot be cut up and served at dinner. The word is only a representation and not the actual thing it represents, remember? Just like when you think of a word, you do not have actual words in your head. It's simple physics.

For arguments sake, I'll agree with you. Words are thoughts. Words are intentional states, the firing of neurons and states of the physical brain. Ever time we dissect a brain words fall out or seep into the air. Every time someone is thinking, they are actually talking. Sentences are composed of mind substance. Words actually are what they represent, and not just arbitrary sounds and letters. Ink on paper, sounds from the mouth, are representation of words and not actual words.

My question is: How does someone else's thoughts, brain physiology and mind—their words—hurt you?

reply to post by Itisnowagain


I actually have four guns; not one fired with malicious intent. And you on the other hand?

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


Nice to have some mutual understanding and even agreement.

Thx.

However, the simple physics DOES include BRAIN-CODED VERSIONS OF WORDS.

In terms of your questions . . .

WORDS CONVEY MEANING.

Actually, we could say WORDS ARE MEANING.

There is NO MEANING

WITHOUT, APART FROM words.

You can even go further to note that . . . as the Bible says . . . essentially . . . that WORDS HAVE THE POWER OF LIFE AND DEATH IN THEM.

Proverbs 18:21 The tongue has the power of life and death, and ...

... The power of the tongue is life and death— those who
love to talk will eat what it produces. ...

All the more so for young children who are forming their self-concept; learning who they are in foundational ways etc.

WHEN a parent dozens of times a day declares that

the young child 0-8 is a stinking pile of poo . . .

THAT MEANING, CONSTRUCTION REALITY in a kind of emotional, spiritual, psychological, existential, FOUNDATIONAL sense--THAT MEANING BECOMES THAT CHILD'S REALITY in a list of serious, substantive, extensive and devastating ways.

THAT "reality" becomes the child's "real" "reality" about themselves. And it can take decades to overcome--if it's ever fully overcome.

That CONSTRUCTION of the child's identity FORMED WITH WORDS becomes HARDWIRED into that child's brain. The child's brain actually becomes DAMAGED as verified by many MRI studies--BY THE WORDS repeatedly spoken over the child about the child's worth and essence.

That's just a FACT . . . and daily . . . a very devastating fact around the world.

And that's why I am so hostile to your assertions to the contrary.


Oh, BTW . . . and I'm not as superficial as you . . . and others seem to make me out to be. LOL.

LesMisanthrope
reply to post by BDBinc

 

You say you agree AND then disagree with Hermes, with his wisdom.

Yes. I agree the mind and the body are one in the same.

When words are perceived with your mind is that not “finding them”.
You now say you cannot perceive (sense) words, how or why then are you writing about them with such exuberance ?

I never said we do not perceive words, only that they do not enter a place called "mind" or "perception". You must understand, to think and to perceive are actions, not places where things exist. Actions require an agent to perform the action. Actions themselves are not agents.

Do thoughts not verify the presence of words arising in the mind?
Or did you just just say you are mindless ( or empty of thought)?

To quote Itsnowagain who answered you (as always)very succinctly
“ The perceiver and the perceived are not separate - they arise as one.”

I would say you are alive and maybe you would say “no because I can’t find it” . Then argue with me that life does not exist because you “can’t find it”.
To see you need eyes that are open.

Thinking verifies nothing except that we think.

To say the perceiver and the perceived are not separate is the same as saying it takes a perceiver to perceive. It is like saying it takes a runner to run or it takes a swimmer to swim. It is meaninglessness dressed in verbal profundity. It proves nothing except that shallow is deep to some people.

I am fairly certain I am alive and would never say the opposite. I am considered an instance of "life". Can you find me an instance of mind?

Why do you think you are "an instance of life"?
Then Is your "instance of life" mindless?
When you think you are alive that to you is not an instance of mind.

Words don't arise in your thoughts? so they don't verify words? I am certainly not here to argue with you whether words exist (in reference to the person).


One of the problems still is that you go from one idea of yours to the next saying you now have no mind after claiming you have no words. Yes the subject is lost to you. You are contradicting yourself and trying to say thought and sense are separate.

It is not meaningless to say the perceiver and the perceived are not separate is important for you to understand that you if you try using reason (that to seek to understand something) you do not separate things that are not separate . As one cannot be without the other.

Its funny to read a mind ask “can you find my mind”? .
Are you are now saying you can’t find your mind now. First you don’t/can’t perceive of words now its your mind that’s gone awal LOL excellent.
In terms of your not seeing the incorporeal, you cannot see the whole UV spectrum but it does not mean its not there.
In fact you can see very little in the scheme of things.

reply to post by BDBinc

Why do you think you are "an instance of life"?
Then Is your "instance of life" mindless?
When you think you are alive that to you is not an instance of mind.

You said mind is a place where things exist, except there is no place. I never said we do not think. Thinking is an instance of thinking, not an example mind.

Words don't arise in your thoughts? so they don't verify words? I am certainly not here to argue with you whether words exist (in reference to the person).

This is more empty language. Words do not "arise in thoughts". What does that even mean? There is no such place where words arise in. We think about words, yes. But they don't "arise" in things called "thoughts".

You speak in abstraction and reference to things that don't exist, yet promise you are speaking truth and laugh as those that don't believe as you. Your words are empty, and you think them full.

One of the problems still is that you go from one idea of yours to the next saying you now have no mind after claiming you have no words. Yes the subject is lost to you. You are contradicting yourself and trying to say thought and sense are separate.

You are the one saying words "arise" in places called "thoughts" and "mind", yet have never seen, felt, heard or know of such a place. By saying it is immaterial, you admit that you don't know what it is. The subject was never even there for you in the first place.

Words exist in "minds" and "thoughts"? Show me then. Where are these places? Where are the words that fill them? If they are in the senses, surely we can find some words in there.

Its funny to read a mind ask “can you find my mind”? .
Are you are now saying you can’t find your mind now. First you don’t/can’t perceive of words now its your mind that’s gone awal LOL excellent.
In terms of your not seeing the incorporeal, you cannot see the whole UV spectrum but it does not mean its not there.
In fact you can see very little in the scheme of things.

Ultraviolet waves can be seen. Frequencies can be observed. How else would we know they are there?

What about your mind? What instrument have you used to detect it?

LesMisanthrope
We think about words, yes. But they don't "arise" in things called "thoughts".

Words arise, thoughts arise but there is no 'you' thinking about them.
Thoughts arise and there is no one thinking - there is an awareness that a word has arisen.

reply to post by Itisnowagain

Words arise, thoughts arise but there is no 'you' thinking about them.
Thoughts arise and there is no one thinking - there is an awareness that a word has arisen.

Then where do your words come from if from nothing? How does a nothing speak? How does a nothing type? Do nothings have mouths and fingers?

If you are nothing and from nowhere and amount to zero, why do you act the complete opposite?

LesMisanthrope
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

Words arise, thoughts arise but there is no 'you' thinking about them.
Thoughts arise and there is no one thinking - there is an awareness that a word has arisen.

Then where do your words come from if from nothing? How does a nothing speak? How does a nothing type? Do nothings have mouths and fingers?

If you are nothing and from nowhere and amount to zero, why do you act the complete opposite?

All is just happening - the illusion of separation is the cause of the suffering - things/words are taken personally,
The root of all religions point directly to the fact that there is nothing separate doing anything. All is just appearing to happen - apparent existence is happening but it is not happening to anyone.
When this is truly seen then all conflict ceases - the two become one.

LesMisanthrope[/I]

Then where do your words come from if from nothing?

Where do yours come from?
Have you ever looked to see where there come from and what they appear in? Not by going to a book about brains but actually directly looking right now to see what is actually going on.

edit on 2-12-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)