What is lovely about John V is that he gives freely. There aren't many if any adds. He seems a genuine, decent man who wants to help his fellow men and they in turn help him . N
Carl Gustav Jung was trying to turn of his inferential western machinery part of his mind during his red book experiment and documented his later analysis of the eastern esoteric and western hermeticism in the black books as a prism through which to be a better therapist because in order to help guide patients in their confrontations with the unconscious he knew he must look deeply within his own unconscious and glean insights from the collective. The ultimate relevance realization .
“Relevance Realisation” Haa Haa the next Marvel Movie ! I think you are mis representing what Jung was doing. He believed One had a responsibility to relate to the unconscious. He Taught his clients to relate to their own unconscious, they were all self guided. He was just a neutral observer. That is a critical point. Jung was practically focused on bringing about real observable changes in people’s experience. His work and experiences ultimately led to the realisation that people must live with and in relationship to the unconscious. That is the sum of his life’s work, he had no time for quick fixes because he knew better. - “relationship to your own unconscious.” That’s the revelation. But people do not want to hear it ! Haa Haa Haa 😒
I find it fascinating that within and during the meaning crisis of the Hellenistic movement we see the emergence of Jesus as the Logos and the impact of that incredible timing.
It seems intuitive that a move away from the distraction of self is a move toward objectivity to inhabit wisdom. However, often the Eastern principals require extreme detachment from society and inner self in the hope of finding the least resistant "nothing objectivity". The overwhelming theme within many religions espouses the self-path toward "objectivity". What is stunningly different is the message of Yeshua Hamashiach in which the highest actions (love the one God and love each other) seem to appeal to outward focus not inward focus. Focus on service to others creates the meaning and the wisdom. Experience with other people is the relational connection to wisdom. The development of the Church (similar to the functionality of an ant community who's collective wisdom becomes evident above any singular wisdom. It is exactly opposite of the philosophical "self-path". What intellectuals talk about, the salt of the earth do in living practice. The correlation between self-help, self-path, self-discovery....all paths lead to meaningless nihilism. Food for thought.
Asceticism in the Eastern Orthodox Christian tradition has nothing to do with self-denial or punishment of the flesh as it might be understood in the western branch of Christianity. It is exactly what the word implies, well in Greek at least, namely, exercise or practicing techniques to partake in the uncreated energies of the Triune God. The word 'ἄσκησις' (askesis) in Greek is literally the exact same word with the exact same meaning used for both monks on Mount Athos practicing and the professional athletes. So the meaning has not changed, but it is used by varying people for different end goals. In the Eastern Orthodox context for the monks, it is used to attain spiritual transcendence through grace and it practically involves constant mental exercises (i.e askesis) and physical exercises (prostrations, etc). If anyone is interested in delving a little deeper into these kinds of topics look into the Philokalia, a compilation of writings by monks of Mount Athos. It is quite heavy and might even seem like far east Buddhist etc practices, but it is deeply rooted in Christianity and its mysteries.
Don’t exercise and practice include discipline, which has something of self-denial in it? You cannot be disciplined and self indulgent at the same time, can you? Or what are you meaning exactly by self-denial and punishment. I agree that punishment is not the right word to use, but I don’t see a problem using self-denial to describe exercise and practice.
Fascinating ! I had studied Pierre Hadot too ! That's why the point of view of Vaerveke is so deep and original. I would like that he, one day write a book on how to achieve personal wisdom.
Hello, l use that very 'overview all the time and have for many years, l call it vicarious imagination, or' the objective view', very useful in art and the practises of life. It is true that it becomes not only a way of contemplative thinking on certain particulars but also the very way one participates and exists within everyday. All the best, and thank you for your programmes. William gilchrist. .
This was fantastic. thank you so much. If it isn't too much of an imposition, might I pester you to put the literature mentioned throughout the discussion into a mini bibliography? If you can't do so for lack of time, that is completely understandable. Will try to order a copy of Hadot's work and make an attempt to get a hold on the Daily Stoic guide.
Seems to me the “wisdom of the crowd,” “distributed cognition,” etc., in pursuit of “wisdom” presupposes and requires a prior mastery of the habits by which you gain access to the “meta-rationality” that simultaneously reorganizes and culls “old wisdom,” offers “new wisdom”, and a perspective that intelligently integrates it all. Again, it seems a group cannot achieve together what individual personal habits do not yet support. This seems the root of all failed communities: the failure of individuation before congregation.
you described how you read the simplicity of vision and that started a journey of Neoplatonism and you saw some of the original practices of Christianity that were lost. What were they and how can I look into that topic more?
Visit your local Orthodox Christian church and talk to the priest. So much of what John talks about here (and in his other work) is directly manifested in Orthodoxy. Many practices of Stoicism and Neoplatonism were integrated into Orthodoxy and there is a deep and overflowing medicine cabinet of medicines for the soul there.
“You should be scaling down and scaling up attention. Know how to break frame in meditation and make an alternative frame in contemplation.” John Vervaeke “Live baby live Now that the day is over I got a new sensation In perfect moments” INXS - 1987*
"He wants to be Moses and I want to be Socrates. That's the difference between us" 59:30. As Tertullian would say "What does Athens have to do with Jerusalem?"
What Athens had to do with Jerusalem was providing the elements which became the intellectual and spiritual synthesis that guided Western culture for almost 2 millennia. Now, western culture is fitfully attempting to lead a synthesis of global culture, including science and pre-scientific cultures. The latter attempt is looking right messy at the moment, and other than the impetus, the actual synthesis may come from outside of the west.
I would really like to hear his understanding of Nietzsche’s critique of Socrates as a figure who intellectualizes everything and seeks to “correct existence”, on the basis of Ideals, at every turn.
In Johan Vervaekes Awakening from the Meaning Crisis episode 23, he speaks a bit about this, and Nietzsches misunderstanding of Reason and likewise his postmodernism.
I can definitely see how some of these practices and techniques could be therapeutic, but I can also see how sociopaths and others who seek to manipulate human beings might become expert at them as well. I don’t think these are automatically linked to wisdom.
Thank you! I love you people! Hey John, what about the rigorous Tibetan Buddhist practices of debate and intellectual discourse on Abhidharma as practiced for the Geshe/Geshema dialectical examinations??? There is intellectual rigor in Buddhism, it’s just in a slightly different form and propagated more widely when traditions stepped out of oral, recitation basis and into written commentary.
I find it interesting that you've replaced the cynic with the skeptic. I don't think Alexander would rather be a skeptic. Popular culture first occludes the cynic, then kills him.
Using "Sensible" thinking for most day to day decisions is a step towards "Wisdom". We are babies in regard to Wisdom, our set point is Fear, fear such as non-acceptance, fear of death, fear of one another. Till we can go about living "Sensibly" , making decisions on our own life, or decisions as parents and departments of Governance. Till we have a handle on "Sensible" living a life of Wisdom is a far distant step. We don't have hindsight, this too would be a useful tool for us humans. To ask the Truth of any situation. To be open to all possibilities. Can help us towards living with Wisdom. Thank you one and all. Peace💚💛❤
Zizek talks about this shift of perspective in the beginning of his book Parallax View. It is a concept that has helped me stay alive during the early period of the Dark Night of the Soul.
If we've lost it for historical reasons then ignoring those reasons won't help regain wisdom. There are two places for wisdom; the fullest perspective that sees mutual respect in all its articulations, and in each of us by dharma.
I could be mistaken in any of this, but it seems to me to be a possible overgeneralization to label those (or even most of - or possibly even any of those those) who claim to be "spiritual, but not religious" as necessarily all meaning the same thing in saying that. What any one person or more happen(s) to mean by that could be more or less different from what one or more, or even all of the various other person(s) who make that same claim happen(s) to instead mean(s) by that. It seems to me that there might be a crisis (though not necessarily of meaning, but possibly of only agreed upon meaning - or even of agreed upon supposed meaning, instead) in that what may be taken (or not taken) as having any particular meaning is both potentially taken as not having that same meaning by one or more individuals - but while also being taken as having that same meaning by one or more other individuals. If I or (if I +) take something as meaning (A) , while you (or you+) do not also take that same thing as having that same meaning, then what - if anything - is the actual meaning of that same thing? Even if all took any same thing as having the same meaning, would that meaning then necessarily also be, in any way, the inherent meaning of that thing?
This appears to be a potentially efficacious means to a greater emotional resilience, hardiness or anti-fragility. However, it may not promote greater emotional maturity by itself since it does not appear to equally promote emotional empathy, the other trunk of emotional maturity. Clearly, the presenter is an enthusiast for a “method” that seems to work for him, but the mental health “crises” is about more than assuaging our collective anxiety (inchoate fear). We are disabled by lies, alt realities, conspiracy theories, in short, a real absence of personal character, understanding of our biases, interest in personal change, rather than the “blame game,” i.e., people of one side see the problems of the other, but not necessarily their own. The presenter is an academic, so is naturally led to cognitive answers, not necessarily to emotional problems or answers. We human beings are made of both thoughts and feelings, problematic if we focus on one aspect of our being to the exclusion of the other!
If your philosophy teachers taught you that Socrates was just about arguments, they were confusing him with the Sophists. Anyway, not all philosophy teachers are that slipshod. The first questions Socrates posed , 'What is the good for man?' 'What is a good life?' 'What constutes arete?' are primarily wisdom questions.
The question is whether lobbyists are valid, short answer if the system is meant to be gamed, then the lobbyist is valid, and if the system isn't meant to be gamed then the lobbyist is performing a necessary falsification role. If you get rid of lobbyists then you have to get rid of junk foods and other products that prey on human weaknesses, as this is gaming the system too. There's a lot of business out there trading off this, where do you stop? In a way the challenge presented by exploiting weaknesses is a huge learning experience...would you take that away?
@@projectmalus The problem is context and our inability to learn collectively. Advertising is appropriate, lobbying elected representatives is psychosis; that cognitive science doesn't say so is also symptomatic. ... Seems to me. The whole point of study and application is to learn lessons the easy way; as opposed to the hard way, over and over again.
@@mediocrates3416 If I was to change my channel name it would be 'doing it the hard way' while showing how doing it the hard way is actually the easy way :) I think the problem is maintaining diversity in human systems that tend to degrade it. Study and application is to learn lessons, to avoid creating victims and be fulfilled as a person. This is incredibly hard work and so worthwhile, since it makes that person's life so much easier. This is changed with the assigning of value to money and that presented as the goal in most school systems. All these systems can be tweaked (including the personal system) but elimination of complexity is a power grab imo, probably part of a pseudo religious response as comprehended by that person. It's a personal power grab from a diminished person that assigns to a larger force the agency of themselves so they don't have to feel responsible. Most people are like that it seems and this includes politicians and lobbyists. Maybe it's part of the processed food experiment, also odd chemicals in the environment like those found in plastics, diminishing the sort of personal power I'm talking about.
@@projectmalus Aspartame makes male offspring stupid: there should be a warning on the label. A buddy of mine was on a crusade, he insisted it caused cancer and i asked him to send me refs.. Not cancer, it causes stupid. You don't see the lobby system as bad wiring? That's why i think it should be cognitive science sounding the alarm. I think we here in Canada, for the most part, get diversity; i love it, it's beautiful. We don't get how truth comes from the ground up. The establishment gets it; they don't like it: that's why truth bring war. How is changing one's channel name doing anything? You don't like "Mediocrates"? That's what the moving mountain is made of: after it's done, there'll be a statue to our hero, the nameless average.
Spiritually enabled science provides the Net Joy Integral: all other things being equal, does a particular act increase or decrease net universal joy. Joy is more complicated than pleasure. Universal cuz science.
If the team is distracted and lazy, and the coach "cracks down" on them and makes the team run extra laps when a player makes a mistake, does the coach lack wisdom?
This looks like chasing rainbows to me. It's just that Vervaeke is chasing the rainbows more deeply than others. It's better to ask why you are chasing rainbows. Why be dependent on anything psychological, spiritual, or philosophical?
@@phiswe Answer my question first. Surely, if someone is advocating for dependence, then the onus is on them to make their case. Their argument might be based on illusions.
Worldwide & Phillip capture an interesting didactic.... indeed. Do the homework , contemplate, do both ? As we swim in culture, we are no island. Thus we are dependent, or we imagine we are the source of originality. More independent if we integrate vs. Dissociate our dependence. I am just a dummy trying follow all this heady stuff.
@@worldwidehappiness Your true self transcends your individuality. You have many, many identities that you step into and out of throughout the day. You can only begin to know your true self through your relationship to matter, your relationships to other people, and in your relationship to transcendence. A myopic self-absorbtion can only lead to nihilism and despair. None of us are islands unto ourselves. We affect everyone around us, and everyone around us affects us constantly.
Agnostic; just say it! So it has "gnostic" in it; big deal! My mom was a self proclaimed agnostic: we should all be agnostic, then the gnostics pop up... for a week and then back to agnostic again; good shit.
Don’t look within to find your way/purpose-look to Him who laid down His life for the sheep Acts 17:28 [28] for “‘In Jesus we live and move and have our being’; as even some of your own poets have said, “‘For we are indeed his offspring.’
not my real pseudonym Perhaps because the ‘hands of capability’ do not meet the mind of believing in activity, all the talk in the world will not make sense of experience, yet only sense of knowledge while the world is on fire. when the idea of ‘practice’ is a way forward, without the ‘physical’ to practice, spectatorship remains impotent and returns to business as usual.
@@mellonglass I still think the OP misspoke regarding his assessment of 'over educated' esp when so much of Vervaeke's discussion involved explaining embodied experience, but you lay out a good point about philosophers residing in Ivory Towers. Funny how easily we get locked into either sense-experience or reflection taking over. Would be a great experiment of dialectic to expose those differences in argumentation representation somehow (even if just a skit interpretation of the ideas' expression). Hilariously, I expect this may account for much of John's hand waving when he talks.
