Law School Discussion

Legal Reasoning

Re: Legal Reasoning
« Reply #60 on: November 12, 2005, 02:08:32 PM »
The Jews came from the Middle East, which was urbanized and thus depaganized at an early date. Jews had allegedly lost their pagan roots so long ago that they no longer had access to the collective unconscious. By contrast, Germanic peoples had lost their paganism at a relatively late date, roughly 500 to 1100 AD.

The Jews connection with morality and reason, however, as opposed to the victorious, free-spirit character of the Germanic race, appears a bit artificial, at least a bit speculative.


Re: Legal Reasoning
« Reply #61 on: November 13, 2005, 08:36:16 PM »
You think so, bazar?

Re: Legal Reasoning
« Reply #62 on: November 20, 2005, 07:03:56 PM »
It was claimed that Christianity is a repressive religion, that paganism was inherently freer and more joyous. Paganism found its way into literature and art, for example, into Wagner's operas, and there was a significant non-Christian element to the turn of the century counter-cultural movement.

Pagan Symbols

Theosophical Seal

Re: Legal Reasoning
« Reply #63 on: November 24, 2005, 02:56:41 PM »

Theosophical Seal

Wow, in this seal I recognized this symbol,

It's a design created based on a four-triangle Rosecrucian symbol. It is composed of two figures - a central triangle and a seven-pointed figure. If one travels along the path described by this 7-pointed figure, one goes through a movement similar to the one described by the 6-pointed figure in the Enneagram. The Enneagram could have been drawn in such a way as to avoid using a 6-pointed figure. In other words, it was not because of the absence of adequate seven-pointed figures on which to map the 7-tone scale that Enneagram was chosen, with its 6-pointed figure.

Re: Legal Reasoning
« Reply #64 on: November 24, 2005, 03:24:43 PM »
More or less the same "methodology" to be used to understand Shri Yantra, mybelle.

There is a puzzle that is subtly presented in a completely visual form, without words.

A long-time zen practitioner described the initial EFFECT that the diagram had on him when presented with it and asked to visually meditate on it -

The visual effect of looking at the array of triangles is of a shifting field of larger and smaller triangles, giving almost a perception of depth, as one triangle shifts to one either larger and seemingly closer, or smaller and seemingly farther away. The triangles forming the array (i.e., not the smaller triangles the main triangles form) are either equal sided, or their bottom side is shorter than the two vertical sides. The smaller triangles are generally not uniform, although they are mostly nearly (or exactly) equalsided.

This is a precise and accurate phenomenological description of what may happen when one looks at the diagram, but not yet an insight into its most essential nature. Here's a hint that might be helpful in taking one further into the diagram - What is 'wrong' with the picture? Can you find the visual anomaly that is embedded in it?

Not yet? Try SKETCHING the figure.

Its not easy to draw the figure. But why not? Put your finger horizontally across the center of the figure. What can you say about the remaining portion of the figure? Now remove your finger. What do you see in the horizontal center strip, recently covered by your finger?

Still puzzled? Take a look at the following two diagrams. Which figure is the central figure in the Shri Yantra? How do they differ?

Diagram 1

Diagram 2

The figure to the right is the central figure in the Shri Yantra. The figure to the left was constructed by removing the horizontal strip from the middle ....


.... and replacing it with the SYMMETRICAL center that the remainder of the design visually IMPLIES and therefore causes one to expect.

The illusion that is deliberately built into the Shri Yantra makes it very difficult to draw it freehand, as you no doubt came to realize if, in fact, you did try to sketch it. In order to achieve the intended effect one must keep in mind two goals that pull in different directions, you would have to keep in mind that every line you make is a line in two completely different portraits!

But the Shri Yantra is no MERE illusion, meant simply to delight or entertain. Nor is it just an object lesson in the psychology of perception. It has a profound meaning, one which reveals itself only when the effects of the diagram are studied in relationship to how consciousness becomes capable of 'moving' in certain states that one can enter into in meditation. In their (1975) analysis of the figure, Evans and Fudjack remark,

".... how can we conceive of the [Shri Yantra] as an object for meditation? How is one to fixate attention on the diagram? Well, at first glance the diagram appears to be a symmetrical geometrical design and we know how to fixate attention on such a design by staring at the point of symmetry at its center. However, the Shri Yantra does not have a point around which the design is symmetrically fixed. Zimmer alludes to this by mentioning its 'elusive' center. So in focusing attention inward toward the center we wind up at a point, line, or configuration none of which is a satisfactory center of symmetry. We find ourselves compensating the small center triangle, for instance, by widening our scope of attention to it and some counterpart that promises symmetry. But we pass to this wider symmetry-suggestive area by a quantum leap, so to speak - we lose ourselves and find ourselves staring again at the entire configuration which suggests that the diagram is, after all, symmetrically composed. So we focus in toward the center again in search of that elusive point. We either become dissatisfied or distracted by some other activity or we discover the joke, the trick. The diagram is designed to appear symmetrical when we take it, in its entirety, as an object of attention, but is also cleverly designed to have no point of symmetry. It is an illustration of paradox. Not so much the paradox of time and eternity as the paradox of a symmetrical object without a point of symmetry - a logical contradiction. (C.O. Evans and J. Fudjack, CONSCIOUSNESS, 1976.)

You're taking law all too seriously
« Reply #65 on: November 27, 2005, 06:12:53 PM »
On the issue of holding two contradictory beliefs in mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them (doublethink): well, I would suggest you study a bit Zen Buddhism. You know, Zen is a complete difference in perception to the dominant Western worldview. The Western world, dominated by science, has a logical and rational view of life. Contradiction and paradox are frowned upon in this worldview.

1 + 1 = 2 and cannot be 3.

The rational perspective is only one view of life, and not necessarily the most valid. This is not to say that rationality is wrong, but rather that is limited and only one perception that has been historically and geographically prescribed.

Enlightenment as the goal of Zen Buddhism. This again is a very difficult term to describe in a sentence or two. We can understand enlightenment as knowledge of the truth; but this knowledge is not the accumulative and rational knowledge of the West. The word enlightenment is understandable and frequently used in the religions of the West. A monk went to the Zen master wanting to know more about the truth of enlightenment. When he asked this question of the Zen master, the master replied, "Do you hear the sound of that running brook." "Yes, I hear it," answered the monk. "That is the entrance to the truth" the Master replied to him. From this example a number of things should be obvious. Enlightenment is not a form of perception that is mediated by logic or even cause and effect reasoning. It is an immediate and complete clear view and understanding of the nature of reality.

The misconception of self.
One of the obstacles that stand in the way of the initiate trying to enter into Zen understanding is the concept of the self. This is one of the central reasons why Zen is so difficult for the Westerner. Western perceptions of reality are built on the foundation of the Self and the idea of the centrality of the Ego. In terms of understanding Zen, the greatest obstacle to Enlightenment is the Self. The reason for this situation is that the Self is an illusion created by the society, and by the desires and needs of the individual Ego. It is only in moving beyond the Ego that an understanding of the enlightenment can begin. There is an important difference between the terms "Self" and "ego" that must be understood in this regard. For the Eastern Mind the Self is the true self that has been released from the false self of the ego. In other words, the ego is the illusionary element that traps man into a false perception of reality. The Enlightenment is the break-through from the region of the false self into a new consciousness and awareness that is not limited by the ego.

This distinction between the Self and the false ego is not too difficult to understand in ordinary terms. The self, it is widely acknowledged by psychologists and sociologists, is a construction. In other words, the human self is built from social conventions, personal feelings and history and is, in this temporal sense, an illusion. This illusion of the self stands as a barrier between the true Self and a perception of reality. One only has to think of the false ideals like materialism and envy etc, which absorb us in our daily lives, to understand the validity of the Zen perception of no-self. This is a realization that is skirted over by many Western practitioners of Zen, mainly because of its essential difficulty. But, this is also one of the most significant areas of investigation for the Western person wanting to understand Zen. After fully understanding the illusion of the self, the journey into Zen begins. From this point onwards, we enter into the knowledge of Zen without the encumbrance of the baggage of our daily lives or the illusions of our social selves, but rather concentrating on truth as it emerges beyond both objectivity and subjectivity.

Beyond illusion.

Once the journey into Zen begins the dualistic concepts that once imprisoned the mind, fall away. The ideas of birth and death, pain and joy, no longer have any relevance. For the Westerner this is almost a non-sensical world where there seems to be nothing at all. It is precisely this concept of nothingness that is the source, for the Zen Buddhist, of all reality. It is interesting to note that modern science tends to confirm these strange notions. For example, the "Big Bang Theory" of how the universe began is currently one of the contenders for the most legitimate explanation of the start of our Universe. But this theory proposes a moment before the Big Bang where, theoretically, there was nothing. One of the greatest problems in trying to understand Zen from a Western perspective is that Zen is an intensely personal experience. Enlightenment is achieved and recognized as a personal and individual knowledge that cannot be shared in an outward logical sense. In the West, religion is formal and concentrated in the institution of churches. There is a procedure and knowledge in these institutions that must be followed in a public sense. While individual enlightenment is obviously part of institutionalized religion, it must occur within the framework of the Church and its formal arrangements. This is not the case in Zen, where there are no formal elements and the individual initiate and the master find the path to enlightenment without these restrictions and without any external validation process.

In order for us to come to grips with Zen, we often have to use metaphors and seemingly strange examples to help us to understand this attitude towards life. It is a mode of thought that is essentially non-dualistic. This means that it tends to initiate a mode of thinking that collapses distinctions between opposites. This is very difficult for the Western world that has held opposites, in language and in logic, as the central pillars of civilized thought. In order to understand Zen one must be prepared to question the very foundations of one's life and of the societal influences that affect one. The purpose of Zen is nothing less than total freedom from these dualities of life. In this way, it suggests, we are able to move into a state of mind and reality that is not troubled by anger or fear or by envy and ambition.

At least part of the post quoted here is plagiarized from an article by D.T. Suzuki called "Introduction to Zen Buddhism in America."

Here's the site link. See for yourself:

Le visage en feu
J'arrive à un carrefour,
le feu était au rouge.
Il n'y avait pas de voitures,
je passe!
Seulement, il y avait
un agent qui faisait le guet
Il me siffle.
Il me dit
- Vous êtes passé au rouge!
- Oui ! Il n'y avait pas de voitures!
- Ce n'est pas une raison!
Je dis:
- Ah si! Quelquefois, le feu est au vert . . .
Il y a des voitures et . .
je ne peux pas passer!
Stupeur de l'agent!
Il est devenu tout rouge.
Je lui dis:
- Vous avez le visage en feu!
Il est devenu tout vert!
Alors, je suis passé!

Raymond Devos

Re: Legal Reasoning
« Reply #66 on: November 30, 2005, 06:25:30 AM »
please post it in english, we love poetry but it has to be in english for us to appreciate its magnitude of greatness

Re: Legal Reasoning
« Reply #67 on: November 30, 2005, 07:06:47 AM »
I don't see how you people can pretend to have an intellectual debate over the "hateful" Jews and what not. That's prejudice and prejudice is ignorant, no matter how you dress it up. Remember The Bell Curve? Yeah, that guy was an idiot, too.

Re: Legal Reasoning
« Reply #68 on: December 08, 2005, 10:27:40 PM »

Re: Legal Reasoning
« Reply #69 on: December 08, 2005, 11:17:14 PM »
Well, for now I'll just be understanding and I will not refer people reading this thread trying to figure out the why all this "reasoning" stuff to the other, more relevant thread  here,