I love Landon's insight at the end about releasing the things that have informed us. I have felt many times that I was leaving behind something that had nourished me. The modern temptation is to stya there and be a scholar, quoting chapter and verse. Even in religion, the religious texts must expand and explode to continue to nourish.
Freedom is a concept that has three different aspects to it. One related with survival in the material plane, another one with people's behavior, and a final one related with the spiritual plane.They all are inter-related. In the first case, no one can be free if one is being kept financially dependent on someone or is under the tyranny of an enslaving banking system or a government, for instance. As to the second case, one cannot confound liberty and freedom with doing foolish, rash and dangerous things that will harm others and also oneself. So, in this case freedom can only exist within an ethical framework. Now, in the last case, the sine qua non condition to be truly free, and also the truer meaning of the said word, is to be free of the ego itself, which impels people into doing unconscious and foolish things, besides the fact that, when one transcends the ego (Higher Self or Christ consciousness) one can even be free in the midst of a raving mad world...
Would LOVE an episode with you three focused on explicating the idea of polarity in Barfield (and Coleridge) In spite of Barfields appendix dedicated to the subject (What Coleridge Thought) I can’t seem to apprehend it…
In my mind (and in my own personal journey) they psychodynamics of the individual should be the “starting place” of the move towards the Logos. While most psychotherapy is extremely disappointing, the “fourth wave” experiential psychotherapies (mainly AEDP) are seriously promising for helping plunge the personal unconscious so we can “clean the muddy water” of our minds to be able to sense the Logos and follow it. I think Steiner is great, but he (like most that focus on the spiritual) did not see how culturally and societally most peoples psychodynamic architecture make it impossible for them to spiritually grow (clearly seen in the way the theosophy and anthroposophy groups functioned).
I've come to believe that evil is just 'moral stupidity', meaning a lack of intelligence is present in the moral decision-making process. This perspective, I believe, demonstrates that evil is not a problem of ignorance but of intellectual incapacity. This portrays the problem as a show of inadequacy of the subject rather than a complete unknowing. The question then becomes, how do we acquire the ability to do good? What is happening when we choose good instead of evil knowingly? Do we *gain* ability (and become more free) when we choose good? When I ask the last question, the abundance that goodness brings becomes apparent to me, as it demonstrates the nature of (truly) intrinsic motivation that is connected to every good deed.
I disagree, because this reifies the belief that knowledge is only propositional or language driven. Most knowledge is procedural. An example is “knowing” how to ride a bike. You could read every book ever on how to read a bike but will not have the “knowledge” of how to physically ride the bike and will fall off the first time you attempt to ride one. There are 4 kinds of knowledge (see John Vervaeke). I think the most damming piece of evidence was WW2, with the German and Japanese scientists collectively choosing to do evil even though some of the most intelligent scientists of the generation were German. It’s because they didn’t have the participatory knowledge to be in connection with the Logos or Christ Consciousness.
Three gracious individuals. Yet Mark's Steiner allergy is remindful of Vervaeke's. It is abrupt seeming to me. This seems like an antipathy without engagement in the body of work that inspired and drove Barfield. The aversion also reveals a lack of a serious treatment of Steiner's epistemology. Of course folks are free to not consider epistemology when engaging in religious pursuits. Mark's concern seems however, like many, to be about how people take Steiner as opposed to making up one's own mind via serious engagement with Steiner's work. Otherwise, I love your work Mark.
Steiner is indeed a stumbling stone and his clairvoyant output detached from his epostimology appears to be ridiculous. And yet, especially the young Steiner, is a serious philosopher who showed a way of how we can go beyond the limits that Kantian epistemology set up. I have just listened to a dialogue between John Vervaeke. I am so pleased that Matt Seagal is giving serious consideration to Steiner. In fact he had an interesting online reading group recently in which he discussed Steiner's Riddles of Philosophy and the Philosophy of freedom. I recommend it.
@@brunischling9680 Thank you for your response. As a 30 year student of Steiner in the sense that Vervaeke is a student of Plato and and my friend Matt Segall is a student of Whitehead, I am here to tell you that the epistemological work of Steiner is foundational to his more esoteric work and that the detachment is only apparent (an Appearance as Barfield might say). I was and am part of Matt and Ashton's group looking at Steiner's epistemology. We are currently looking at a series of 18 lectures by Steiner given to scientists and educators, called Interdisciplinary Astronomy. I met another friend Angus, in that group and we took up an alongside treatment of the work in that group for the first two books you mentioned from the young Steiner. You can check that out here www.youtube.com/@TheExceptionalState where we also recently picked up Steiner's Truth and Knowledge. We are currently working through the good Dr's Christianity as Mystical Fact in which, I believe, the epistemological connection to the mysteries over time is made.
![[Live สด] การออกรางวัลสลากกินแบ่งรัฐบาล งวดวันที่ 16 พฤศจิกายน 2567](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wPd7VFfWHIA/mqdefault.jpg)
Absolutely love these conversations between you three.
I love Landon's insight at the end about releasing the things that have informed us. I have felt many times that I was leaving behind something that had nourished me. The modern temptation is to stya there and be a scholar, quoting chapter and verse. Even in religion, the religious texts must expand and explode to continue to nourish.
The glyph upon the page is equal to the sense & meaning it conveys for nirvana & samsara are one...
Max Leyf, Landon Loftin & Mark Vernon = Dream TEam
Thanks a lot🙏
17:00 freedom is the freedom to do what you need to do.
Your definition of freedom is circular - it depends on freedom itself
Freedom is a concept that has three different aspects to it. One related with survival in the material plane, another one with people's behavior, and a final one related with the spiritual plane.They all are inter-related. In the first case, no one can be free if one is being kept financially dependent on someone or is under the tyranny of an enslaving banking system or a government, for instance. As to the second case, one cannot confound liberty and freedom with doing foolish, rash and dangerous things that will harm others and also oneself. So, in this case freedom can only exist within an ethical framework. Now, in the last case, the sine qua non condition to be truly free, and also the truer meaning of the said word, is to be free of the ego itself, which impels people into doing unconscious and foolish things, besides the fact that, when one transcends the ego (Higher Self or Christ consciousness) one can even be free in the midst of a raving mad world...
Would LOVE an episode with you three focused on explicating the idea of polarity in Barfield (and Coleridge) In spite of Barfields appendix dedicated to the subject (What Coleridge Thought) I can’t seem to apprehend it…
Does this article help? genealogiesofmodernity.org/journal/modernity-and-the-evolution-of-consciousness-part-i
@@PlatosPodcasts Thanks so much, Mark! I will definitely give it a read and see….
In my mind (and in my own personal journey) they psychodynamics of the individual should be the “starting place” of the move towards the Logos. While most psychotherapy is extremely disappointing, the “fourth wave” experiential psychotherapies (mainly AEDP) are seriously promising for helping plunge the personal unconscious so we can “clean the muddy water” of our minds to be able to sense the Logos and follow it.
I think Steiner is great, but he (like most that focus on the spiritual) did not see how culturally and societally most peoples psychodynamic architecture make it impossible for them to spiritually grow (clearly seen in the way the theosophy and anthroposophy groups functioned).
I've come to believe that evil is just 'moral stupidity', meaning a lack of intelligence is present in the moral decision-making process. This perspective, I believe, demonstrates that evil is not a problem of ignorance but of intellectual incapacity. This portrays the problem as a show of inadequacy of the subject rather than a complete unknowing. The question then becomes, how do we acquire the ability to do good? What is happening when we choose good instead of evil knowingly? Do we *gain* ability (and become more free) when we choose good?
When I ask the last question, the abundance that goodness brings becomes apparent to me, as it demonstrates the nature of (truly) intrinsic motivation that is connected to every good deed.
I disagree, because this reifies the belief that knowledge is only propositional or language driven. Most knowledge is procedural. An example is “knowing” how to ride a bike. You could read every book ever on how to read a bike but will not have the “knowledge” of how to physically ride the bike and will fall off the first time you attempt to ride one. There are 4 kinds of knowledge (see John Vervaeke).
I think the most damming piece of evidence was WW2, with the German and Japanese scientists collectively choosing to do evil even though some of the most intelligent scientists of the generation were German. It’s because they didn’t have the participatory knowledge to be in connection with the Logos or Christ Consciousness.
This young man, despite my often agreeing with what he's saying, unfortunately gives me a headache listening to him. He goes on and on too much.
Three gracious individuals. Yet Mark's Steiner allergy is remindful of Vervaeke's. It is abrupt seeming to me. This seems like an antipathy without engagement in the body of work that inspired and drove Barfield. The aversion also reveals a lack of a serious treatment of Steiner's epistemology. Of course folks are free to not consider epistemology when engaging in religious pursuits. Mark's concern seems however, like many, to be about how people take Steiner as opposed to making up one's own mind via serious engagement with Steiner's work. Otherwise, I love your work Mark.
Steiner is indeed a stumbling stone and his clairvoyant output detached from his epostimology appears to be ridiculous. And yet, especially the young Steiner, is a serious philosopher who showed a way of how we can go beyond the limits that Kantian epistemology set up. I have just listened to a dialogue between John Vervaeke. I am so pleased that Matt Seagal is giving serious consideration to Steiner. In fact he had an interesting online reading group recently in which he discussed Steiner's Riddles of Philosophy and the Philosophy of freedom. I recommend it.
@@brunischling9680 Thank you for your response. As a 30 year student of Steiner in the sense that Vervaeke is a student of Plato and and my friend Matt Segall is a student of Whitehead, I am here to tell you that the epistemological work of Steiner is foundational to his more esoteric work and that the detachment is only apparent (an Appearance as Barfield might say). I was and am part of Matt and Ashton's group looking at Steiner's epistemology. We are currently looking at a series of 18 lectures by Steiner given to scientists and educators, called Interdisciplinary Astronomy. I met another friend Angus, in that group and we took up an alongside treatment of the work in that group for the first two books you mentioned from the young Steiner. You can check that out here www.youtube.com/@TheExceptionalState where we also recently picked up Steiner's Truth and Knowledge. We are currently working through the good Dr's Christianity as Mystical Fact in which, I believe, the epistemological connection to the mysteries over time is made.