great conversation, I found very helpful John stressing the difference between finality of death and finitude of mortality and that we shouldn't reduce the latter to the former.
This was truly a most wonderful discussion. One aspect that I consider essential but that is usually absent in philosophy, past as well as contemporary, is the elephant in the room-there is no being, or meaning for that matter, if there is no survival. Without that recognition there still exists this anthropomorphic disconnection to one’s own very real and existential value system. And if we’re disconnected to ourselves, we’re going to be equally disconnected to the world. We do not live in a void that’s only upended by the prospect of our final death. The prospect of death is also here and now and it informs our deepest values. Yes, we need to awaken from the generational and personal givenness of experience, but that givenness, too, is an hermeneutics of survival-to simply follow the rules already laid down as a means of energy conservation. We need a philosophy of survival, of ourselves, other beings as well as of the universe as a whole.
I’d also like to state that the reason people disagree with each other is that at root exists a difference of opinion as to how to best survive. Even in the little things, not to mention the political, social, economic, religious, metaphysic, etc., etc. Everything relates to survival, so we certainly can’t have that as simply one more given!
Also, we need to consider those finite features of our being-DNA, cultural beliefs and norms, etc., as the givens that they are, as distinguished from being. Being has a different property, which I believe is self-same in all existents, human or otherwise. It’s the Cosmic I AM. We don’t need a “God” as some kind of mediator through which we can achieve commonality, everything IS the One I AM, already.
Nature is being, too; and in fact, we’re completely encapsulated within it. The tools we build reflect nature’s creativity-what else? When we constrain or channel anything, that’s nature also. Yes, we act to achieve certain (survival) aims, but everything nature does is likewise a claim to survival, or otherwise stated, a claim to existence. Survival/Existence is the claim of God, if God makes any claim at all, because that is what being does/is. It Exists.
I will watch! I’m hoping to hear language that might describe some of my experiences during prayer…I’m Not well versed in any branch of philosophy but I have suspected that phenomenology might have parallels to the world of prayer…
"Science" has a select committee for deciding epistemological focus. As distanced from the "Democratic Process" as is politics. Now the democratic question for science should be "What should be the epistemological focus which provides greatest benefits for a majority of humanity, rather than what seems more of a subsection within it?" If "Truth" is a goal for science, what happens when the communications mechanisms for delivering objective epistemological truth are captured by a subsection of humanity for whatever unknown or undeclared intentions?
@@denesetler I don't read anymore, but there's good lectures on TH-cam. Two, of which one is on how Wittgenstein uses John Henry Newman's "Grammar of Ascent" on religion and faith, and another a lecture at U. of Edinburg with a larger emphasis on the epistemology writ large. Hope that helps. Thanks.
I love this. But many times I feel compelled to say that not everyone can be a priest or a shaman, the vast majority has to be busy little bees, or tools for each other, for society to work as it does today. Sadly.
Hint: if you REALLY want to figure out the meaning crisis, look at the welfare state, not capitalism. Though the two are related (capitalism makes the welfare state possible), the gradual (but ever increasing and accelerating) transfer of agency from the individual to the almighty State (to state AGENCIES, indeed!) is absolutely the cause of the crisis we are experiencing. Disconnecting individual action (effort/initiative/work/ideas...) from results is destructive of the very concept of agency. And agency is essential to meaning. So there you have it. "Agency, not agencies."
Grateful of you guys sharing this Sabiduría with us.
great conversation, I found very helpful John stressing the difference between finality of death and finitude of mortality and that we shouldn't reduce the latter to the former.
This was truly a most wonderful discussion. One aspect that I consider essential but that is usually absent in philosophy, past as well as contemporary, is the elephant in the room-there is no being, or meaning for that matter, if there is no survival. Without that recognition there still exists this anthropomorphic disconnection to one’s own very real and existential value system. And if we’re disconnected to ourselves, we’re going to be equally disconnected to the world. We do not live in a void that’s only upended by the prospect of our final death. The prospect of death is also here and now and it informs our deepest values. Yes, we need to awaken from the generational and personal givenness of experience, but that givenness, too, is an hermeneutics of survival-to simply follow the rules already laid down as a means of energy conservation. We need a philosophy of survival, of ourselves, other beings as well as of the universe as a whole.
I’d also like to state that the reason people disagree with each other is that at root exists a difference of opinion as to how to best survive. Even in the little things, not to mention the political, social, economic, religious, metaphysic, etc., etc. Everything relates to survival, so we certainly can’t have that as simply one more given!
Also, we need to consider those finite features of our being-DNA, cultural beliefs and norms, etc., as the givens that they are, as distinguished from being. Being has a different property, which I believe is self-same in all existents, human or otherwise. It’s the Cosmic I AM. We don’t need a “God” as some kind of mediator through which we can achieve commonality, everything IS the One I AM, already.
Nature is being, too; and in fact, we’re completely encapsulated within it. The tools we build reflect nature’s creativity-what else? When we constrain or channel anything, that’s nature also. Yes, we act to achieve certain (survival) aims, but everything nature does is likewise a claim to survival, or otherwise stated, a claim to existence. Survival/Existence is the claim of God, if God makes any claim at all, because that is what being does/is. It Exists.
I will watch! I’m hoping to hear language that might describe some of my experiences during prayer…I’m
Not well versed in any branch of philosophy but I have suspected that phenomenology might have parallels to the world of prayer…
Great !
Thank you!
I think the Buddhist philosophy would be best suited to an immortal being in that it trains the mind to find continually find value in the present.
"Science" has a select committee for deciding epistemological focus. As distanced from the "Democratic Process" as is politics. Now the democratic question for science should be "What should be the epistemological focus which provides greatest benefits for a majority of humanity, rather than what seems more of a subsection within it?" If "Truth" is a goal for science, what happens when the communications mechanisms for delivering objective epistemological truth are captured by a subsection of humanity for whatever unknown or undeclared intentions?
Gestell could also be translated as "scaffold". I'm interested if there's any proximity to Vygotsky's idea of scaffolding.
I have a floatation tank which is an interesting piece of tech in which to say the Jesus Prayer. Facilitates hesychasm…
Wittgenstein's later thought of basis of thought is relevant here. Recommend Prichard's exposition on how Wittgenstein approach this.
@@denesetler I don't read anymore, but there's good lectures on TH-cam. Two, of which one is on how Wittgenstein uses John Henry Newman's "Grammar of Ascent" on religion and faith, and another a lecture at U. of Edinburg with a larger emphasis on the epistemology writ large. Hope that helps. Thanks.
I love this. But many times I feel compelled to say that not everyone can be a priest or a shaman, the vast majority has to be busy little bees, or tools for each other, for society to work as it does today. Sadly.
Can we get Sundays off?
Key Discussion.
Heidegger and the techno flattening of the world.
Flat earthers have a point. Not literal but metaphorical.
This isn't long enough
I agree! There will be more soon.
Who?
The Unabomber was right.
Hint: if you REALLY want to figure out the meaning crisis, look at the welfare state, not capitalism. Though the two are related (capitalism makes the welfare state possible), the gradual (but ever increasing and accelerating) transfer of agency from the individual to the almighty State (to state AGENCIES, indeed!) is absolutely the cause of the crisis we are experiencing. Disconnecting individual action (effort/initiative/work/ideas...) from results is destructive of the very concept of agency. And agency is essential to meaning. So there you have it. "Agency, not agencies."
Careful not to get Jargon filled in these conversations. It's happening
Dude, they're discussing Heidegger's work. It's impossible to not get jargon filled😂
You like the feel of polyslabic words in your mouth too much... you only think you know what your saying.