Packing Posted January 24, 2016 Report Posted January 24, 2016 When you are thinking about something, there are two entities involved. Let us take the example of you thinking about a football. Here, there are two entities involved. A - The thinker (which is you). B - The thing that is being thought about (the football). Similarly, if you think about a flower, the flower becomes B and you are A. If I am thinking about you, I am A and you are B. A and B are always two separate entities. Now, try and think about yourself. You cannot think about yourself, but only an aspect about yourself. Are you truly thinking about yourself? If you are being thought about, then who is the real thinker? If you are the thinker, who is the YOU that you are thinking about?
cool_dood Posted January 24, 2016 Report Posted January 24, 2016 When you are thinking about something, there are two entities involved. Let us take the example of you thinking about a football. Here, there are two entities involved. A - The thinker (which is you). B - The thing that is being thought about (the football). Similarly, if you think about a flower, the flower becomes B and you are A. If I am thinking about you, I am A and you are B. A and B are always two separate entities. Now, try and think about yourself. You cannot think about yourself, but only an aspect about yourself. Are you truly thinking about yourself? If you are being thought about, then who is the real thinker? If you are the thinker, who is the YOU that you are thinking about? as per your context A is always constant being me or you or whoever the subject is and B is variable could be a thing a living being or abstract things such as what you have done (ur actions) - when I am trying to think about myself - I am reflecting myself through my own actions. In naive terms you are defined by your actions and for the q are you truly thinking about yourself - yes I am thinking about my own actions.
cool_dood Posted January 24, 2016 Report Posted January 24, 2016 neway what is the point of this discussion - you wanted to know peoples openion about it or any other motive?
sooperu Posted January 24, 2016 Report Posted January 24, 2016 When you are thinking about something, there are two entities involved. Let us take the example of you thinking about a football. Here, there are two entities involved. A - The thinker (which is you). B - The thing that is being thought about (the football). Similarly, if you think about a flower, the flower becomes B and you are A. If I am thinking about you, I am A and you are B. A and B are always two separate entities. Now, try and think about yourself. You cannot think about yourself, but only an aspect about yourself. Are you truly thinking about yourself? If you are being thought about, then who is the real thinker? If you are the thinker, who is the YOU that you are thinking about? A- the thinker, B-Flower/football/studies are separate entities. When A & B is within a close proximity, then it is A's selection of choices to watch B which is within A's close vicinity & either think about it (or) alternatively A could constantly glare B's existence & think about a contrasting entity which can be C. In another scenario B could possibly be given the thinking ability on par with A' skillset & start thinking about A. Here A&B are identical entities who are able to think about each other. Both A&B can think about entity C (the original entity "B" at the same time, provided they are within visible reach. Both A&B can think about contrasting C (i.e A's C can be a football/flower, whereas B's C is something different eg: reading,at the same time, though both of them are watching a common C which is in reach to both. While A&B are immersed in thinking about the entity C (originally provided "B") their cognitive abilities provide ample clues to decipher the relative thought process about C. To understand the self & their thinking process, both A&B will need to focus on the triggering shafts which have set a cause for them to channelize their time & efforts on one entity.
sooperu Posted January 24, 2016 Report Posted January 24, 2016 This observation is valid when the thought process is strictly isolated on one entity. When A/B is able to streamline the thought process on C & is also able to govern about himself/herself without being lost one single point, they are naive & sophisticated in finding their current state of existence & are able to think of multiple entities at the same time with finesse.
Ruler4Dmasses Posted January 24, 2016 Report Posted January 24, 2016 A- the thinker, B-Flower/football/studies are separate entities. When A & B is within a close proximity, then it is A's selection of choices to watch B which is within A's close vicinity & either think about it (or) alternatively A could constantly glare B's existence & think about a contrasting entity which can be C. In another scenario B could possibly be given the thinking ability on par with A' skillset & start thinking about A. Here A&B are identical entities who are able to think about each other. Both A&B can think about entity C (the original entity "B" at the same time, provided they are within visible reach. Both A&B can think about contrasting C (i.e A's C can be a football/flower, whereas B's C is something different eg: reading,at the same time, though both of them are watching a common C which is in reach to both. While A&B are immersed in thinking about the entity C (originally provided "B") their cognitive abilities provide ample clues to decipher the relative thought process about C. To understand the self & their thinking process, both A&B will need to focus on the triggering shafts which have set a cause for them to channelize their time & efforts on one entity.
Ruler4Dmasses Posted January 24, 2016 Report Posted January 24, 2016 A- the thinker, B-Flower/football/studies are separate entities. When A & B is within a close proximity, then it is A's selection of choices to watch B which is within A's close vicinity & either think about it (or) alternatively A could constantly glare B's existence & think about a contrasting entity which can be C. In another scenario B could possibly be given the thinking ability on par with A' skillset & start thinking about A. Here A&B are identical entities who are able to think about each other. Both A&B can think about entity C (the original entity "B" at the same time, provided they are within visible reach. Both A&B can think about contrasting C (i.e A's C can be a football/flower, whereas B's C is something different eg: reading,at the same time, though both of them are watching a common C which is in reach to both. While A&B are immersed in thinking about the entity C (originally provided "B") their cognitive abilities provide ample clues to decipher the relative thought process about C. To understand the self & their thinking process, both A&B will need to focus on the triggering shafts which have set a cause for them to channelize their time & efforts on one entity.
Recommended Posts