"I listen to music in the foreground and write in the background." Hmmm, very interesting. I'll try this out. I find that I can focus best in a busy bar; where I'm swarmed with noise and activity I'm able to disappear into my work. When I try to read/write with background music, the music becomes a distraction.... and without music, silence is a distraction. ..but putting music in the foreground and choosing music that supports the subject.. I'm excited to try this out.
@@mmiv37 I can never listen to music in the background... Someone has put their time and effort to make interesting patterns of sounds (or boring and repetitive ones in some cases - 4-chord songs for example - which are never easy on the ears and are sounds I would never have the urge to listen to anyways), so I can't help but feel obliged to listen to a captivating artistic creation whenever good music is being played. Good art is hypnotic.
29:36 __ I think most of the avant garde composers of 20th century and experimental musicians of electronica starting from 50's were mostly into this aspect of music without being as specific as Mr. Bach.
I think the questioner in 19:14 meant something very intelligent but did not know how to articulate it. He meant "How does it feel to be the person who translated the works of a person who really lived the myth as an individual, and who did not relegate any of his knowledge or understanding to pre-packaged sources like the example of how concerts are like zoos but for emotions." He is of course speaking as a person who only knows the psyche through the Zoo, meaning that he is still dependent upon Others to complete the myth and meaning FOR him. Whereas Jung, as is evident from his Black Books, would find it absolutely revolting to see his works put up in a zoo. The example Shamdasani brought up about the German words Jung used that do not translate to english perfectly (Jung himself made up a personal secret language in his youth) is evidence to this fact. The man who asked this question, his identity, is diffused into the collectivity. Someone like Jung who contracted and introverted this collective identity into the Self, into something wholly independent and individual necessarily has an influence upon people who have a latent proclivity towards the psyche and are therefore half-way there. Shamdasani himself had a partner whilst working on translating and therefore we must say psychologically not even the translator can answer this question honestly.
While I really respect and love Dr. Sugrue(RIP) for his contributions to our understanding of history, he is not unlike the many philosophers he covers when speaking about his own worldview the ideas start to fall apart. When I watch him speak about the world he seems to be an America-Centrific Christian Conservative using the same rhetoric to keep powers that be. He always attacks Marxism and The Frankfurt School more than a capitalist theology. He believes in ownership and elitism. American superiority. Oppressing free speech if it disagrees with him. He talks of Woke-ism like an alt right Jordan Peterson type. Lots of contradictions masked in quotes from philosophers to sell his rhetoric. Philosophers that were wrong. He has a dislike for Democracy and young people. Says he dislikes the hive mind but at the same time wants to create an elitist hive mind. He's not for the will of the people, but for the views of very few he deems to be intelligent.
Thanks for the comment! I would disagree that he had a dislike for young people - he kindly offered his time to us young students at the RNCM for no cost at all, and for (sadly) quite a small audience. I don't think he oppresses free speech either - he argues very strongly that we should be able to discuss everything freely, especially at the universities, otherwise proponents of repressed ideas can represent themselves as being oppressed, which can generate an otherwise undeserved compassion for their ideas.
@RNCM_Philosophy I agree with everything you say here. I think you may have misinterpreted my comment as though I think he's an absolutist or something. The last part of my comment may be a bit too direct and aggressive. I've watched every video he's done multiple times, and my point is that if I were to break down the totality of his philosophy, he leans Christian Conservative liberal capitalist in theory. Though I doubt he votes Republican. That said, he's a wonderful teacher and fair to all sides.
@@blurredlenzpictures3251 For sure! I would say that him swinging towards 'liberal christian capitalist' isn't something he wouldn't question though, he's undogmatic about his christian beliefs and believed that a capitalist mentality should be kept in check by compassion towards other people. I believe elsewhere he also said that he was a 'recovering marxist', so I would be surprised if he didn't take a charitable stance towards other contrary ideas.
What if you dont know how to love? He did a really far conceptual leap there at the end. Who is supposed to love, the addicted person or the people around the addicted person? Are you asking an addicted person to pull themselves up by the bootstraps by just starting to love themselves out of a dire situation? Seeing that Vervaeke has this line that he refers to as the ground principle for love where he says that you should learn how to love wisely, this type of reply is full blown mysticism -- it does not say anything in my estimation.
Timestamps: 00:00:55 How Meaningful Do You Want Your Life To Be? 00:06:49 The Limits of Creativity; Taking Risks 00:12:48 Freedom Vs Discipline 00:17:52 Technique Vs Creativity; Learning from Mistakes 00:37:24 The Flow State 00:44:37 Iain McGilchrist, Left Vs Right Hemispheres; Perfectionism Vs Wholeness 00:54:34 What Makes an Artwork Great? 01:03:00 Is Music Rational? 01:09:23 The Importance of Good Taste 01:16:20 Love is the Most Important Thing 01:25:29 Having Fun! 01:37:13 Conclusion: John Vervaeke & The Meaning Crisis
I don't have the words that can come close to how much knowlege this wonderful soul shared. Teacher your lecturers on in particular Marcus Aurelius and my favourite Gorgias literary changed my life. Few ppl truly understand and grasp such knowledge/virtue that they can then pass on to a zombie I once was. You sir put wind in my sails and gave me direction and I will never forget you or the knowledge you shared. Peace be upon you Michael, you are now in the halls of the blessed accompanied by the most virtuous men that have ever walked the earth. ❤
So envious you got to ask Don any question you liked.Great discussion. Donald Hoffman makes me feel the world is on the cusp of something and I think he needs young people to come on board with the new mathematics and and mind boggling theories to begin this new era of the melding of science and spirituality.Very exciting.
I can’t tell if he is really Christian. He likes some of the parables and the ethics, but doesn’t care if Jesus was raised from the dead? That was shocking to hear since he has always identified as a Christian (Catholic). Every Christian I know says that the entire religion hinges on the resurrection.
He was both a Platonist and a Christian. Trying to embody the values of both Socrates and Jesus gives you a religion and the ability to criticise it. Like Dr Sugrue said, maybe making sense isn't everything
The problem with the apparent difference between macroscopic vs. microscopic level in quantum mechanics is simply that we cannot isolate macroscopic events as easy as we do it with microscopic events on subatomic levels, since usually there are a lot of interaction processes with environmental conditions, in physics this is called decoherence. Therefore is a lot more difficult to "prove" quantum mechanical effects in our so-called "real" world, like superposition or quantum entanglement, usually this only works on subatomic levels under laboratory conditions..although quantum mechanical effects are of course an intrinsic part of countless technologies (and solar processes) since decades now..
A lot of this discussion is treading very closely to The Unanswered Question by Leonard Bernstein, where he discusses actual musical elements in phrenology and how semantics can and cannot be applied. I personally feel music and text or language cannot mix, but they can have a similar inner fundamental tone like Coltrane's A Love Supreme. Bach considered the doctrine of affections where the emotions can be arranged in a kind of colorwheel and have complimentary relationships or contrapuntal juxtapositions. Great unique questions here and it really showed how technical the language of description or expression is and how conscious a person has to be to tread in this area.
Timestamps 00:31 Introduction to Donald's ideas 09:14 How does your theory affect our understanding of daily life? 12:59 A further exploration of Donald's ideas 17:10 Is reality whatever we choose it to be? Can myths be true? 21:10 Music perception & Synesthesia 24:27 Understanding other people's perceptions 26:04 Overcoming divisions between people 32:34 Ontological Agnosticism 39:29 Paradigm Shifts & Scientific Revolutions 42:10 Problems with Empiricism & other philosophical challenges 53:50 Overlaps with Buddhist Thinking & Scientific Spirituality 1:04:02 Truth vs Heuristics 1:11:13 Is there a collective mind? Joscha Bach: "Networks of Caring" 1:17:33 Post-Hegelian Philosophy (Zizek) 1:21:07 What is Beauty? 1:24:55 What is Artistic Taste? 1:26:17 How does language affect perception? 1:32:41 Love your neighbour as yourself 1:36:37 Psychedelics 1:39:40 Do I exist? 1:44:44 A funny moment of synchronicity 1:48:23 How to put these ideas into practice 1:50:57 Conclusion
My answer to Prof. Sugrue around 49:00 in is that society conditions and determines who has intellect and what values and positions count as intellectual. So you can bring benevolence and intellect to a greater overlap by changing the structure democratically, as long as a sufficiently benevolent and charismatic figure breathes truth into an idea. And remember that Christ and other figures of benevolence always appear as idiots as we know from Tolstoy This was a moving discussion
I agree with your criticisms of postmodernism, how people wear their beliefs like a costume, and reasoned argumentation has given way to a costume contest, but in all fairness Lacan warned us about this decades ago. Ditto for your critiques on authenticity, identity, self-esteem, but unfortunately the standards for his proponents aren't as high as yours. I'm saying I wish people as well-read and honest as you and as Lacan himself were reading and pushing his concepts
Timestamps 00:30 Daniel's vision for the future of music education 08:39 Problems with Online Teaching 13:38 Learning to Teach Yourself; Starting Violin as an Adult 19:40 Ivry Gitlis, The "Scratch Scale" 21:41 Abhi's journey from Doctor to Violinist; dealing with Self-Doubt 37:43 Rachmaninoff: how to be a hypnotic performer 42:10 Augustin Hadelich's humble yet hypnotic genius 48:15 The Magician vs the Mechanic 52:02 The Art of Legato 1:06:18 What is Good Taste? 1:15:15 Imitating Great Artists 1:20:32 Managing Self-Criticism 1:29:07 Confidence vs Doubt 1:31:54 Love vs Addiction (John Vervaeke); Spiraling into Freedom 1:42:37 Awkwardness in Developing New Techniques 1:48:19 Practicing with Flexibility to Develop Your Musical Toolkit 1:53:15 Approaching Opposing Ideas (Michael Sugrue); Philosophy & Music 1:58:51 Becoming an Individual Musician 2:00:33 Conclusion
