I think the proper question for this answer is "What are we?"I think the proper answer is probably the same."Everything that does not think about what we are."That was my point exactlyFor me the statement suggests that it may not be necessary or desirable to identify the locus of your exsistence in your thinking processes. You can at least theorize that if some kind of mental connection was established with the totality of your being and not just the talking consciousness part of you, it might provide a greater insight into the connectedness of everything and a non-verbal awareness of the boundarylessness of your exsistence. Further, you could theorize that this awareness and insight would not be regarded by you as being a trival or meaningless experience.Sure, you can theorize that. You might even be right. You can also theorize that obtaining this "insight into the connectedness of everything and a non-verbal awareness of the boundarylessness of your exsistence" that you would realize that it is a meaningless experience, and you might get a kick out of that.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra