Words Are Power (Jesus, ritual, Jehovah, myth, experience)

[doppelgänger]

Originally Posted by Ozzie

Buddhist practice does not "aim" to pull subliminal signals into the light of conscious examination. Also there is no habituation process involved in examination of thought in order to form "trends" of thought that may be described as symbols.

My statement was based on the excerpt I posted above. As always, I don't purport to speak for what any religion's practice is other than to quote something from some individual who purports to practice it.

Originally Posted by Ozzie

Neo is constructing a reality of which he defensively is part, not examining the contents of his mind impartially. Am I wrong?

The reality is already constructed. He is perceiving how it is put together. And because the shift from seeing the signs instead of the things they signify occurs within Neo (the code itself isn't changing, it's just becoming visible to him), then yes, he is examining the contents of his own mind.

[rojse]

Originally Posted by UltraViolet

No... but I'm gunna look into it a bit.
Ever since the english language I speak and write,
opened itself up to me,
I have thought that EVERY language has it's own
unique sound /meaning idiosyncracies
(ex... sound alike/different spelling, same spelling/different meaning)
not to mention the entire gramatical construction,
figures of speech,
what a word for a thing "implies" in it's totality,
the whole sound... (gutteral, smooth, rolling etc)
and that all this must COMPLETELY effect/affect?
a pereson's whole reality construct.
Their whole assimilation and understanding of life.

And yet for those who step INSIDE their own language
KNOWINGLY for the purposes of deeper level reality formation
(for either illusory "trickery" or true "transformation")
a WHOLE wonderful world all it's own must open up.

Besides the language of Music,
I've never had any dedicated interest in learning any language
(other than my own).
This whole line of thought however,
makes me wish I knew ALL OF THEM!

Greedy me.

Thanks rojse!

There are a few variants upon this, based on how much people believe language affects thought, or, the inverse, thought affects language.

A example that supports a weaker version of the original hypothesis is an experiment where people were asked to memorise different green tones, and were asked to recall them later. People that spoke a language that had specific name for those types of greens remembered the colour shown better than those that did not have a specific name for those green tones.

Wiki link to Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis