Wholeness

For intuitive and critical discussions, from spirituality to theological doctrines. Fair warning: because the subject matter is personal, moderation is strict.

Moderator: Dan~

Re: Wholeness

Postby felix dakat » Sun Oct 18, 2020 12:00 am

Dan~ wrote:
felix dakat wrote:I am a novice in the mode of life I am now living and trying to express on this thread. In the early 90s on reading the existential philosophers Tillich and Heidegger and Jaspers I embarked on a path of living according to being instead of instrumental knowledge. But I wasn't making the connection to Jung. It was Peterson and then James Hillman through whom I came back to Jung not primarily as a personality theory but as a means of tapping into my own psyche through the phenomenology of the image. That's what I'm espousing here. It's a way obscured by dogmatic religion and this high tech cyber-bombarded age. The image is the font of thought. Hypnagogic consciousness is the gateway to such mysteries of the pleroma as can be experienced in this life. Don't take my word for it. Connect with it yourself.

I've never heard of these people before.

Do they have youtube channels?


Yes, plenty of them.
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8895
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: Wholeness

Postby felix dakat » Sat Oct 24, 2020 1:54 am

Your first mistake is to suppose that you understand yourself.
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8895
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: Wholeness

Postby MagsJ » Sat Oct 24, 2020 6:05 am

_
Indeed.. because the moment we think we know ourselves, we don’t, and we cease to be that person that we were a few moments ago.

I have always been of the thought that this was an inherent self-evolving mechanism.. to foster competitiveness of the self, rather than having to seek out external competition.. against others. Independent from.. rather than dependent on, others, for our thoughts feels and dos.

So being in constant flux and flow.. so never stagnating, always originating. :D
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ

I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Wait, What! - MagsJ

You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 20575
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka/LDN Town

Re: Wholeness

Postby felix dakat » Sat Oct 24, 2020 6:48 pm

MagsJ wrote:_
Indeed.. because the moment we think we know ourselves, we don’t, and we cease to be that person that we were a few moments ago.

I have always been of the thought that this was an inherent self-evolving mechanism.. to foster competitiveness of the self, rather than having to seek out external competition.. against others. Independent from.. rather than dependent on, others, for our thoughts feels and dos.

So being in constant flux and flow.. so never stagnating, always originating. :D


Yes. The living are becoming. The become have died.
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8895
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: Wholeness

Postby felix dakat » Sun Oct 25, 2020 5:15 pm

You can't run your life on a set of rules. Sets of rules related to any extant religion give us mere crude approximations of life. They don't give the individual enough specific details to provide guidance in actual situations.

Life is too complex. The factors at work in every situation are too subtle for a rule book. Besides, the rules that arrive from the various concrete religions we're all written at different points of history based on assumptions and the prejudices of the time in which they were written. They cannot take the place of our conscience and rational conscious reflection on our existential experience and situation. This is "Dasein".

And not only that, Dasein ought to recognize, that encompassing one's conscious decision-making are unconscious elements that, in fact, may be the decisive elements. To be fully, responsibly conscious is to embrace uncertainty.
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8895
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: Wholeness

Postby felix dakat » Mon Oct 26, 2020 5:00 pm

The goal of existential phenomenology is a description of the entire activity of the I in the life world.

What is God, religion, spirituality or wholeness in the life world phenomenologically when metaphysics is bracketed?
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8895
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: Wholeness

Postby felix dakat » Mon Oct 26, 2020 5:19 pm

Conversely, what are the implications of wholeness in the context of metaphysical speculation? If the universe is viewed as a unit are not all its parts related to the wholeness of the universe? And if so is there not some interrelationship between the wholeness of the universe and the activities of every individual component?
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8895
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: Wholeness

Postby felix dakat » Mon Oct 26, 2020 7:50 pm

Sein= the ground of being, ultimate reality

Dasein=being for me

Whatever I say about Sein is speculative. Whatever I say about Dasein, insofar as it authentically represents my life world, is descriptive.

Phenomenologically, Jung could say of God "I don't believe, I know." because he was referring to the God of his experience, his life world.
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8895
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: Wholeness

Postby Ierrellus » Tue Oct 27, 2020 12:26 pm

felix dakat wrote:Conversely, what are the implications of wholeness in the context of metaphysical speculation? If the universe is viewed as a unit are not all its parts related to the wholeness of the universe? And if so is there not some interrelationship between the wholeness of the universe and the activities of every individual component?

Is this pantheism according to Spinoza?
"...incarnate in the sod;
Then I am but a part of you
And both a part of God."--Ierrellus, 1961.
"We must love one another or die." W.H.Auden
I admit I'm an asshole. Now, can we get back to the conversation?
From the mad poet of McKinley Ave.
Ierrellus
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 12862
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: state of evolving

Re: Wholeness

Postby felix dakat » Tue Oct 27, 2020 5:47 pm

Ierrellus wrote:
felix dakat wrote:Conversely, what are the implications of wholeness in the context of metaphysical speculation? If the universe is viewed as a unit are not all its parts related to the wholeness of the universe? And if so is there not some interrelationship between the wholeness of the universe and the activities of every individual component?

Is this pantheism according to Spinoza?
"...incarnate in the sod;
Then I am but a part of you
And both a part of God."--Ierrellus, 1961.


Could be. I like your verse very much.

I'm keeping to phenomenology. I'm not adhering to any metaphysical schema.

I entertain images. Therefore, I called my questions speculation.

I view the holographic universe as a possibility. Physicists Bohm and Hailey state "any attempt to assert the independent existence of a part would deny this unbroken wholeness."

Tillich points out that Spinoza establishes a naturalistic pantheism which denies finite freedom and in so doing denies freedom of God. By necessity God is merged into the finite beings and they're being is his being. God is the substance of everything and there is therefore no substantial independence and freedom in anything finite.

So Spinoza's philosophy was consistent with scientistic determinism. Do you see the problem with that?

It basically negates our experience of freedom. So in practice we seem to refute it every time we act as an agent. Is freedom nothing but an illusion? Or is Spinoza's theory inadequate somehow?

I think the mystics were right. Ultimate reality is incomprehensible. What do you think?

We also have the symbol of panentheism as distinct from pantheism. I was reminded today in another dialogue of Buber's thesis of the I-Thou relationship in which the "I" is uplifted by the recognition of the Sacred in everything.
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8895
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: Wholeness

Postby MagsJ » Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:21 am

felix dakat wrote:Yes. The living are becoming. The become have died.

So those who are ‘stuck in a rut’ aren’t truly living, then.. or it’s a half-life, at the very most.

So to become whole, is to be unfettered and with direction, it seems.. no dissonance / no duality, so a reconciliation of these malaise needs to be achieved, before we can say that we are.

Once achieved.. the trick is to stay there, and not have to keep revisiting that point in the journey, to our own unique individual somewheres.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ

I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Wait, What! - MagsJ

You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 20575
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka/LDN Town

Re: Wholeness

Postby Ierrellus » Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:00 pm

felix dakat wrote:
Ierrellus wrote:
felix dakat wrote:Conversely, what are the implications of wholeness in the context of metaphysical speculation? If the universe is viewed as a unit are not all its parts related to the wholeness of the universe? And if so is there not some interrelationship between the wholeness of the universe and the activities of every individual component?

Is this pantheism according to Spinoza?
"...incarnate in the sod;
Then I am but a part of you
And both a part of God."--Ierrellus, 1961.


Could be. I like your verse very much.

I'm keeping to phenomenology. I'm not adhering to any metaphysical schema.

I entertain images. Therefore, I called my questions speculation.

I view the holographic universe as a possibility. Physicists Bohm and Hailey state "any attempt to assert the independent existence of a part would deny this unbroken wholeness."

Tillich points out that Spinoza establishes a naturalistic pantheism which denies finite freedom and in so doing denies freedom of God. By necessity God is merged into the finite beings and they're being is his being. God is the substance of everything and there is therefore no substantial independence and freedom in anything finite.

So Spinoza's philosophy was consistent with scientistic determinism. Do you see the problem with that?

It basically negates our experience of freedom. So in practice we seem to refute it every time we act as an agent. Is freedom nothing but an illusion? Or is Spinoza's theory inadequate somehow?

I think the mystics were right. Ultimate reality is incomprehensible. What do you think?

We also have the symbol of panentheism as distinct from pantheism. I was reminded today in another dialogue of Buber's thesis of the I-Thou relationship in which the "I" is uplifted by the recognition of the Sacred in everything.

Yes, I believe in panentheism because I believe in a Prime Mover.. I do think that the concept of God evolved with the evolution of Man. I see evolution as deterministic and creative. Freedom is possible within the confines of creative evolution. Ultimate reality can be experienced without being articulated. The mystics try hard to say what it is. Maybe no one can.
"We must love one another or die." W.H.Auden
I admit I'm an asshole. Now, can we get back to the conversation?
From the mad poet of McKinley Ave.
Ierrellus
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 12862
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: state of evolving

Re: Wholeness

Postby felix dakat » Thu Oct 29, 2020 4:17 am

At best we have some kind of right brain intuitive sense of Ultimate Reality. But UR is beyond human comprehension. We aim at UR with ciphers, symbols, myths, metaphysics and art. UR is the great unknown which encompasses our knowledge. The intimation of UR can produce in us our deepest feelings of terror, awe-- the "mysterium tremendum" but can also evoke the "peace that passes understanding".
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8895
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: Wholeness

Postby Ierrellus » Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:10 pm

Regarding the Whole, I realize that it can be seen as Nature with no reference to a God. The only argument a spiritual person can present against that view is the fact of having had a spiritual experience of the whole.
Regarding freedom, it is as if a man is placed in a room. He has space to freely move about the room, but he cannot get through its walls. He notices that the room is expanding. So freedom is the possibility of movement within an expanding confinement. That's the skinny on human evolution. Now, the big question is whether or not evolution is the activity of a God. Left brain ideas will not answer this question. I agree that right brain intuition may touch on the answer.
"We must love one another or die." W.H.Auden
I admit I'm an asshole. Now, can we get back to the conversation?
From the mad poet of McKinley Ave.
Ierrellus
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 12862
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: state of evolving

Re: Wholeness

Postby felix dakat » Fri Oct 30, 2020 7:28 pm

Ierrellus wrote:Regarding the Whole, I realize that it can be seen as Nature with no reference to a God. The only argument a spiritual person can present against that view is the fact of having had a spiritual experience of the whole.
Regarding freedom, it is as if a man is placed in a room. He has space to freely move about the room, but he cannot get through its walls. He notices that the room is expanding. So freedom is the possibility of movement within an expanding confinement. That's the skinny on human evolution. Now, the big question is whether or not evolution is the activity of a God. Left brain ideas will not answer this question. I agree that right brain intuition may touch on the answer.


These I take to be metaphysical questions. Like a good existential phenomenologist for a long time I have kept such questions bracketed. More recently under the influence of archetypal psychology I began to entertain them as images. The Jungian symbol for wholeness is the mandala. Tibetan Buddhists draw those in the sand beautifully and elaborately and then destroy them in a heartbeat. That might be a fitting metaphor for the ephemerality of metaphysical philosophical systems.

Jung speculated that UFOs were mandalas projected onto the sky. Imagine that giant UFO in the movie Independence Day. It has the appearance of an immense city. In the book of Revelation, the author, John, sees the New Jerusalem coming down out of heaven, a quaternal mandala of gargantuan proportions. Maybe Jung's hypothesis is not as absurd as it sounds on first hearing.

Now what can I say about evolution in the context of this thread on the vision of wholeness? The theory of natural selection was hit upon by Darwin and Wallace in a century where theories of evolutionary idealism were popular. Like philosopher and psychologist William James and Jung himself for that matter, Wallace went on to become deeply involved in spiritualism. The theory flipped the philosophy of the time about evolution from idealism to naturalism.

The theory of natural selection is, of course, popular among scientifically oriented biologists, as it underpins much of modern biological science. And the vision of our continuity with other living species has revolutionized what it means to be human in the 21st century.

Evangelical Christians have a problem with it because it seems to contradict their literal interpretation of Genesis. People with new age or occult inclinations like the idea that humanity was put here by aliens of some sort. This they support with various unexplained ancient architectural structures.

However, evolution by natural selection has massive evidentiary support in biological science. Perhaps the reason people look for alternative theories is that natural selection doesn't seem to explain the spiritual side of human life.

Evolutionary psychology tends to be reductive. I know you've read Michael Dowd who attempts to pull evolutionary theory and religion together. Are you familiar with Robert Wright author of "The Moral Animal", "Nonzero" and the Evolution of God? His theory of some kind of teleology behind evolution is modest compared to Dowd's.
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8895
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: Wholeness

Postby Ierrellus » Sat Oct 31, 2020 12:23 pm

Thanks for the reference to Wright and for your good post. Yes the matter of religion and evolution boils down to the problem of teleology. I'll be reading Wright as soon as I can locate him. We do have a state-wide borrowing library that is connected to universities as well as local collections. The book should be easy to find. Thanks again for not seeing my ideas and Dowd's as some mental contraption as others have.
"We must love one another or die." W.H.Auden
I admit I'm an asshole. Now, can we get back to the conversation?
From the mad poet of McKinley Ave.
Ierrellus
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 12862
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: state of evolving

Re: Wholeness

Postby felix dakat » Sat Oct 31, 2020 5:05 pm

Ierrellus wrote:Thanks for the reference to Wright and for your good post. Yes the matter of religion and evolution boils down to the problem of teleology. I'll be reading Wright as soon as I can locate him. We do have a state-wide borrowing library that is connected to universities as well as local collections. The book should be easy to find. Thanks again for not seeing my ideas and Dowd's as some mental contraption as others have.


Calling concepts "mental contraptions" is Iambiguous's way of dismissing the ones he doesn't like. Like Steven Pinker and Michael Shermer, Wright sees moral progress across human history. While not going so far as proposing that a God is behind this, Wright suggests that it may be more than an accident-- that there may be some kind of purposeful structure behind it.
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8895
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Previous

Return to Religion and Spirituality



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users