Maaan, these talks are slow like a snail and deep like Mariana trench. It is not for average people. Similar to phenomenon a "koan". Whatever, Bless on Your consciousness.
Like the imagery :) ..... also spot on that it is not everyone's cup of tea. However, slowing down and deepening is the key to opening doors of perception.
@TheExceptionalState 100% true.I agree. What I realized in meditation: Words open Worlds. ... "Palabras abrè Mundos" ... "A Szavak vilàgokat nyitnak meg." ...
"Conciseness" is actually "concision". Leaving that aside, German was a revelation for me. I also speak French, but German is just so divergent in terms of vocabulary and the way that the grammar enables a diversity of ways to organise material. It's a wonderful medium for theoretical thought, in particular. I'm not surprised that so much philosophy was written in that language.
I agree, one of the beauties of German is the clear etymologies of words. This means there is a level of transparency to German words that is only achievable for an English speaker who also has a fairly thorough knowledge of Latin (or its offspring - French, Italian Spanish etc) and also a Scandinavian language, because of the Viking influence (eg Norwegian/Danish or Swedish) www.etymonline.com/search?q=conciseness concision (n.) late 14c., "a cutting away, mutilation," also, from 16c., "circumcision," from Late Latin concisionem (nominative concisio) "a separation into divisions, a mutilation," literally "a cutting up," noun of action from past participle stem of Latin concidere "to cut off, cut up, cut through, cut to pieces," from assimilated form of com-, here perhaps an intensive prefix (see con-), + caedere "to cut" (from PIE root *kae-id- "to strike"). From 18c. it began to be used in the sense of conciseness (q.v.). Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision. For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh. [Philippians iii.2-3] In Philippians iii.2 it translates Greek katatomē, a contemptuous substitution for the usual peritomē "circumcision," in reference to the Judaizing teachers who taught that Christian converts must first be circumcised. conciseness (n.) "brevity of statement, expression of much in few words," 1650s, from concise + -ness. [Conciseness] is the English word familiar to the ordinary man: concision is the LITERARY CRITIC'S WORD, more recent in English, used by writers under French influence & often requiring the reader to stop & think whether he knows its meaning. [Fowler]
Something I would love for us to pick up next time as I think it will overlap nicely with what is to come. In Chapter 9 Steiner after laying out the objective nature of thinking does a thought plausibility experiment of sorts. He makes the statement that the thought world or thinking consciousness is not a different reality individual to individual. Before this he says something that seems to contradict this statement . He says that thought doesn't exist out in the world like facts it only exists in human consciousness. This is where the statement of plausibility comes in. He says imagine that there is only one sphere of thought and that we bring our own individual personalities into the world's thought center. If this were the case such a thought center would have to be in human consciousness. Is he speaking of a collective human consciousness? Knowing that other species evolve as a collective there would seem to be such a reality that binds a species. First is that binding what we experience as human thinking consciousness? At first this would seem absurd. But lets take another step in the experiment. If there is consciousness like my dog "lower" than mine, that is to say the area of concern is more narrow and temporal, Is there consciousness higher than human? If so would not that include and exceed human thinking consciousness just as I share and exceed animal consciousness?
Hi Jeff. These apparent contradictions are resolved (the concepts are synthesized) for me when we really take to heart the notion that thinking is an organ of perception. However, the big difference is that whilst other organs of perception don't require my active conscious participation, thinking does. It would be like the eye having to produce its own light to see, or the ear producing its own sound to hear or the heart producing its own love to feel.
@@TheExceptionalState Yes I enjoyed living within this seeming paradox. Living in the polarity provides for a new perception. There is something that coheres a species and though it is incalculable and nowhere sense perceptible, it is perceivable. I am suggesting the same lawful reality that holds the human species together holds the human personality together. Funny but this is what leading thoughts 140-149 is a meditation on in my nascent understanding. If the Spirits of whole epochs and and generational relations are also referred to as spirits of personality and Michael is a personality that is an Archai doing the work of an Archangel and thinking is a perceiving beyond the sense perceptible well then..... We shall see. Perhaps one could say we produce our own warmth that allows us to truly see and prepare our own souls to resonate with the music of the spheres and notice that our hearts are a vessel for the the resurrection of the I in the receiving of the corpse and revivification and re-emanation of that which we have received.
Maaan,
these talks are slow like a snail and deep like Mariana trench.
It is not for average people.
Similar to phenomenon a
"koan".
Whatever,
Bless on Your consciousness.
Like the imagery :) ..... also spot on that it is not everyone's cup of tea. However, slowing down and deepening is the key to opening doors of perception.
@TheExceptionalState 100% true.I agree.
What I realized in meditation:
Words open Worlds.
...
"Palabras abrè Mundos"
...
"A Szavak vilàgokat nyitnak meg."
...
@@subliminal81 si las palabras abren mundos ... por eso mi empresa, cuando lo tenia hace muchos años, se llamaba Waywithwords
waywithwords.se/
"Conciseness" is actually "concision". Leaving that aside, German was a revelation for me. I also speak French, but German is just so divergent in terms of vocabulary and the way that the grammar enables a diversity of ways to organise material. It's a wonderful medium for theoretical thought, in particular. I'm not surprised that so much philosophy was written in that language.
I agree, one of the beauties of German is the clear etymologies of words. This means there is a level of transparency to German words that is only achievable for an English speaker who also has a fairly thorough knowledge of Latin (or its offspring - French, Italian Spanish etc) and also a Scandinavian language, because of the Viking influence (eg Norwegian/Danish or Swedish)
www.etymonline.com/search?q=conciseness
concision (n.)
late 14c., "a cutting away, mutilation," also, from 16c., "circumcision," from Late Latin concisionem (nominative concisio) "a separation into divisions, a mutilation," literally "a cutting up," noun of action from past participle stem of Latin concidere "to cut off, cut up, cut through, cut to pieces," from assimilated form of com-, here perhaps an intensive prefix (see con-), + caedere "to cut" (from PIE root *kae-id- "to strike"). From 18c. it began to be used in the sense of conciseness (q.v.).
Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision. For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh. [Philippians iii.2-3]
In Philippians iii.2 it translates Greek katatomē, a contemptuous substitution for the usual peritomē "circumcision," in reference to the Judaizing teachers who taught that Christian converts must first be circumcised.
conciseness (n.)
"brevity of statement, expression of much in few words," 1650s, from concise + -ness.
[Conciseness] is the English word familiar to the ordinary man: concision is the LITERARY CRITIC'S WORD, more recent in English, used by writers under French influence & often requiring the reader to stop & think whether he knows its meaning. [Fowler]
Something I would love for us to pick up next time as I think it will overlap nicely with what is to come. In Chapter 9 Steiner after laying out the objective nature of thinking does a thought plausibility experiment of sorts. He makes the statement that the thought world or thinking consciousness is not a different reality individual to individual. Before this he says something that seems to contradict this statement . He says that thought doesn't exist out in the world like facts it only exists in human consciousness.
This is where the statement of plausibility comes in. He says imagine that there is only one sphere of thought and that we bring our own individual personalities into the world's thought center. If this were the case such a thought center would have to be in human consciousness. Is he speaking of a collective human consciousness? Knowing that other species evolve as a collective there would seem to be such a reality that binds a species. First is that binding what we experience as human thinking consciousness? At first this would seem absurd.
But lets take another step in the experiment. If there is consciousness like my dog "lower" than mine, that is to say the area of concern is more narrow and temporal, Is there consciousness higher than human? If so would not that include and exceed human thinking consciousness just as I share and exceed animal consciousness?
Hi Jeff. These apparent contradictions are resolved (the concepts are synthesized) for me when we really take to heart the notion that thinking is an organ of perception. However, the big difference is that whilst other organs of perception don't require my active conscious participation, thinking does. It would be like the eye having to produce its own light to see, or the ear producing its own sound to hear or the heart producing its own love to feel.
@@TheExceptionalState Yes I enjoyed living within this seeming paradox. Living in the polarity provides for a new perception. There is something that coheres a species and though it is incalculable and nowhere sense perceptible, it is perceivable. I am suggesting the same lawful reality that holds the human species together holds the human personality together. Funny but this is what leading thoughts 140-149 is a meditation on in my nascent understanding. If the Spirits of whole epochs and and generational relations are also referred to as spirits of personality and Michael is a personality that is an Archai doing the work of an Archangel and thinking is a perceiving beyond the sense perceptible well then..... We shall see. Perhaps one could say we produce our own warmth that allows us to truly see and prepare our own souls to resonate with the music of the spheres and notice that our hearts are a vessel for the the resurrection of the I in the receiving of the corpse and revivification and re-emanation of that which we have received.