Music Talk Board

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73

"you will always be

My favorite pussy"

(04-17-2013, 10:26 AM)Mr Maps Wrote: [ -> ]So, I always thought it'd be kinda cool to be a Buddhist monk, as I could see myself fitting the faith and being a monk would be a nice way of life. Until I learnt this rule they have to stick to:

No dancing, singing or music.

Stupid Buddhists ruining the fun.

(04-17-2013, 11:55 AM)JoelCarli Wrote: [ -> ]Really? Doesn't sound very Buddhisty at all.

It's only if you're going hxc into being a monk that you have to do abstain from dancing/singing. As in like going to a monastery, shaving your head, and dedicating yourself 100% to mindfulness and the like. Being a Buddhist monk would be difficult for me. That's why the deeper you go into Buddhism the more "rules" there are. For lay Buddhists there's just the 5 precepts, but the list gets longer the more dedicated you want to be for the cause. However, the precepts are really just suggestions rather than rules. You don't have to follow all of them necessarily. Really all you have to do to be a Buddhist is to believe that you can free yourself from life's sufferings through the Buddha's teachings and live your life accordingly (4 noble truths, 5 precepts, three jewels). You don't need to become a monk and live in the woods somewhere. Of course it branches off into different kinds of Buddhism where different things are often times required, but I think that stuff gets too far into dogma that Siddhartha never liked.

(04-17-2013, 12:11 PM)JoelCarli Wrote: [ -> ]Cool guy Has some solid points.

Also regarding that Buddhist claim, aren't there some Buddhist performers and actors and whatnot? I know a fictional example is Lisa Simpson who plays the sax.

Lotsa Buddhist famous people. Richard Gere (he narrates the best film about Buddhism), Orlando Bloom, Steve Jobs, Leonard Cohen, Tiger Woods, etc etc.

Interestingly, I was thinking Richard Gere when I wrote that down Tongue

During my semester, in French, I read The Ice People (La Nuit des Temps) by RenÃƒÂ© Barjavel (a book I recommended in the Polymath thread). It tells the story of

a team of researchers in the Antarctic who discover, deep underground, a sphere holding a man and a woman in stasis. They reanimate the woman, ElÃƒÂ©a, first (they can't immediately reanimate the man) and find out that her 900 000-year-old, quasi-utopian, technologically advanced civilisation was obliterated in nuclear war; the sphere was created to hold her (the "ideal" woman at the time) and a male in order to ensure the continuation of the human race.

Thing is, her civilisation owned a supercomputer that decided from the get-go the ideal romantic companion for every member of society. This said, ElÃƒÂ©a is madly in love with her ideal companion, PaÃƒÂ¯kan, who died during the war; the man in the sphere is (thought to be) the scientist who created it, a man named Coban, whom ElÃƒÂ©a hates.

One of the researchers of our era, Simon (the protagonist), falls madly in love with ElÃƒÂ©a. However, even though he is the only researcher ElÃƒÂ©a feels safe with (she becomes anxious when he leaves her side), his love goes unrequited because the feelings ElÃƒÂ©a has for PaÃƒÂ¯kan are beyond what this-age humans know as being in love, so beyond it that the translator supercomputer owned by the researchers is unable to find an appropriate term for it.

SUPER MEGA SPOILER CAUTION I CAN'T STACK SPOILER TAGS FOR SOME REASON

So, ElÃƒÂ©a is still very much in love with her ideal companion whom everyone thought was dead until the team attempts to reanimate the man in the sphere. In order to do this, the team requires a blood transfer from ElÃƒÂ©a, who decides that living without PaÃƒÂ¯kan is too painful, and thus secretly poisons herself, ultimately killing herself and... the man everyone thought was Coban. This man was actually PaÃƒÂ¯kan, who managed to kill Coban before he got into the sphere. This renders all the hard work the team put into this discovery (it goes beyond the scope of this whole love story; it involves advanced knowledge and technology) useless.

This got me thinking. How do people manage to date or re-marry after being widowed? I've always thought it was really, really odd that someone who is grieving, following the death of someone they loved deeply and more than anything, decides to carry on as if that person never existed in the first place. Maybe it's me being a prude in white armor again but I don't see myself marrying again if my future wife (if any, lol) dies.

A lesser example would be that your pet dies, you grieve, and a few days later you get another one.

I'd feel bad if I were to just "replace" someone I loved so much. That said, I understand why ElÃƒÂ©a did what she did, considering she was more than just in love with PaÃƒÂ¯kan. If she requited Simon's love, she wouldn't have been in love with PaÃƒÂ¯kan in the first place... right?

Another question would be: does this mean that humans can genuinely be in love with more than one person at a time, and what does that imply when we put polygamy in the picture? Humans tend to have many mates in their lives, despite usually having only one at a time, making them effectively polygamous by definition. Keep in mind that I believe that love is monistic and that platonic love = romantic love. The latter is merely the first combined with pheromones.

That being said, I believe in at least 4 levels of love:

Ignorance/apathy - I am ignorant towards a carpenter in Botswana, and am apathetic towards an person I see in transit at the airport; rejection is impossible.
Likeness - I like the cashier at the videostore because she is kind, but I'll likely forget about her in the moments I leave the store; rejection usually doesn't phase a person much (or in this case may end up in complaint to the manager for bad service).
Love - I love certain friends and family members; rejection can hit hard.
In love - I am madly in love, passionate about a person to the point that rejection hits the hardest; can drive to things such as depression, anxiety, and suicide. Can apply to "platonic" or "romantic" love.
EDIT:
Gondawan love - Named after the continent ElÃƒÂ©a and PaÃƒÂ¯kan are native to; presumably a greater love than "in love". The emotional and mental effects of rejection are beyond the scope of our current understanding, although it is assumed to be impossible by definition.

(05-07-2013, 04:56 PM)JoelCarli Wrote: [ -> ]This got me thinking. How do people manage to date or re-marry after being widowed? I've always thought it was really, really odd that someone who is grieving, following the death of someone they loved deeply and more than anything, decides to carry on as if that person never existed in the first place. Maybe it's me being a prude in white armor again but I don't see myself marrying again if my future wife (if any, lol) dies.

Well, I think a lot of those people don't think of it as replacing. They realize that the dead person probably wants them to be happy more than anything else. So, they don't replace that person. They find happiness in a different way.

That's the thing though, I'd want my lover to be happy if she outlives me, but I'm not sure I'd be partial to her finding happiness in someone else, in the same way she did with me.

EDIT: By that I mean loving someone else the same way she did me. I'd be more than glad if she found happiness by surrounding herself by people she loves.

I dunno. I used to think there was just one person out there for me, but I'm beginning to see that there may be multiple people that I could be happily married too. This has come partially because I've sort of changed my conditions for "love". I just want to find someone who I can enjoy spending my life with. I don't want them to hold me back from anything I could otherwise accomplish, and I don't want to hold them back from anything they would otherwise accomplish. I suppose really I just want a suitable companion for the adventures of my life. I don't really care about finding someone who makes me feel all crazy anymore, I don't think I want the whirlwind of love. I'd rather just find someone who will allow me to be myself.

(05-07-2013, 06:21 PM)JoelCarli Wrote: [ -> ]That's the thing though, I'd want my lover to be happy if she outlives me, but I'm not sure I'd be partial to her finding happiness in someone else, in the same way she did with me.

EDIT: By that I mean loving someone else the same way she did me.

But here's the key. She wouldn't be finding happiness by loving someone else in the same way. Love isn't merely physical. Yes, she may end up kissing, sleeping with, even possibly bear the children of the person who comes after you. However, since love isn't one dimensional; she'd be loving that person after you for much different reasons and would probably have a different* type of relationship with them than she had with you.

*Different because everyone has different personalities, for one.

Then it shouldn't be taboo if I have more than one lover at a time, then.

This is where it gets me.

I dunno, I hear my parents talk about their relationship. Apparently, the day they met, "they knew" they were made for each other in a way that they had never felt in any previous relationship. They apparently "knew each other" already. Sounds like esoteric thinking but still, what, 50% of marriages end up in divorce? And my parents still visibly love each other, and they tell me that they're not too upset about failed previous relationships, but that failing this one would have been devastating for both of them.

Maybe it's wishful thinking to me Confused

hrug:

Adam

JCizzle

bbbrad

JCizzle

JCizzle

crazysam23

JCizzle

Danjo

crazysam23

JCizzle