Yuyutsu,

Squeers has a point. For what are we without our immersion in the symbolic order - or our culture? We cease to exist as an "individual" without the "other". The "logic" you employ to rationalise the existence of God is derived from this state of being.

Could it be that individuals crave a return to a womb-like state or that of a newborn - a time before separation, when they were everything and everything was them?

Is this why man insists on a spiritual plane where everything is united into One?

asqeers quote..""despite politically conservative and religious protestations..which insist..on the category of the "individual", the "person",the "self",the "soul",these are all highly dubious designations and there is no hard evidence such entities exist.""

clearly you are not a group
to wit..you ARE an individual

clearly you think your a person
[i know that a legal 'person'..is a fiction
to wit legally corperations are called persons]
se how dead corperations lord it over the living?

have subverted human rights upon persons
IM NOT A PERSON...are you?

im my self...ie a material body
sustained to live by my spirit
when this meat dies all that i am is a soul
the collective..of my material eaerthly being...still living thanks to the wholly spirit

i fail to see what you call dubious

""these are social constructs,
"interpellated" representations,..earnest affectations,
conjured credulously into discrete being
when we are first called to the stage.""

life is not a calling
its a granting of a physical need]

life isnt a stage
its a school

where beasts lEARN how to become man

so much more we need to reply..[teach to each other]

god allows life its excess..so we chose to reject the materialism
reject the individuality..learn to see beyond our self

by loving god
by loving neighbour
thinking of other..knowing each living is our other

its the love you give
more than the life you live

see beyond this material speck in the aether

see in it..is you...
yet within you..is the rest of it

>> Could it be that individuals crave a return to a womb-like state or that of a newborn - a time before separation, when they were everything and everything was them?

Is this why man insists on a spiritual plane where everything is united into One? <<

Day to day living was and can still be perilous, I think Poirot has made a significant point of the longing for peace, the cessation of pain, no responsibilities, no consequences such as the living must do in order to keep a roof over one's head.

Making a living is so mundane as to be rejected by the most pious who rely upon donations from people who labour. Monks across the world from a variety of religions rely upon maintaining the ideal of worship, else they starve and have nowhere awe-inspiring in which to live. The vast majority of religious clergy do not opt for caves, and even more rarely remain in said caves permanently.

One only has to look at the Catholic Pope to see an excess of materialism that only compares to the excess of corporatists such Murdoch or massive business monopolies where the key to the executive bathroom is as fanatically pursued as the promotion to Cardinal, Bishop or Lama.

OUG,

"clearly you are not a group
to wit you ARE an individual"

The "individual" can only rationalise his existence in relation to everything else. A human child could NOT conceive his existence as a human individual without interaction with other humans. Everything depends on this relationship.

"Severely autistic" humans do not make the transition from one state to the other. They do not conceive themselves as anything in particular because they are unable to make the necessary connection with other humans.

No man is an island.

Dear Poirot,

"Squeers has a point. For what are we without our immersion in the symbolic order - or our culture? We cease to exist as an "individual" without the "other"."

We are what we are, God, regardless of being temporarily immersed in the human condition or any of its manifestations, including culture. Words can never describe what we are, but as they must be used here, I use "individual" to point to the fact that we are responsible for our own spiritual progress, that we cannot rely on others to do it for us. If OTOH, I was addressing someone who's full or pride, then I would rather use "other" to remind them to discard their false identity.

"The "logic" you employ to rationalise the existence of God is derived from this state of being."

Perhaps so, had I actually been attempting to rationalize the existence of God, but would it matter? would it change the truth in any way?
But I didn't: if I claimed that God exists, that would seem to reduce Him to the state of a material object.

"Could it be that individuals crave a return to a womb-like state or that of a newborn - a time before separation, when they were everything and everything was them?"

Certainly, individuals can crave for all sorts of things.

"Is this why man insists on a spiritual plane where everything is united into One?"

A spiritual plane? I haven't seen any! I think we have enough trouble with the material plane to want to add an extra one.

Since you mentioned cultural constructs and rationalizations, let me remind you that "One" is also among them. Claiming that "God is one" is an attempt to reduce Him to a comfortable mental construct, which in effect leads us into being lost in the mind. What we are does not depend on our rationalizations, I urge to you to experience this directly rather than by using your mind to try to understand.

"No man is an island."

Nor are you a man (or a woman as the case may be)!

Yuyutsu,

If we "are" God, why do we have to work as individuals on our spiritual progress? If it's all beyond the material plane or rationalisation, why do we employ logic or read scriptures or take note of our experiences to form a conclusion? (as you say you do)

Progress to what or where?

And why do you imagine that you "know"?