|
millzy


Registered: 05/12/10
Posts: 12,409
|
|
Quote:
MarkostheGnostic said: Which do you aspire to, fame or philosophy? A philosopher worthy of being called such, would not trifle with fame as a matter of social standing, regardless of how long that fame endured. Fame belongs to an Adlerian power motive, beyond "social interest" to a quest for "superiority." In the scheme of aeons, a true philosopher would only smile at the presumption of fame.
the greek thinkers were not without fame. after athens lost the war to sparta, critias of the "thirty tyrants" - the spartan puppet regime put into place in athens after the war - attempted to recruit his cousin socrates into their ranks. socrates' refusal is largely what led to him being brought before the archon's court in his final days. plato's notoriety led to him being blackmailed by dionysius II of syracuse into being that king's court philosopher for a period of time before escaping back to athens and returning to the academy. aristotle was the personal tutor of alexander the great. while none of these men sought out celebrity in the modern sense that you're referring to, they were mostly certainly famous in their day as well as ours.
Quote:
I enjoyed much of Terrence McKenna's writings, but he is not a great philosopher so much as a great showman, right after the style of Timothy Leary. He hob-nobbed with Ram Dass, and Leary, and others, and I imagine he had a lot of fun, not having to work a nine-to-fiver, but he remained a showman. I value his contribution as one who got a lot of people to think about things beyond which they would have had they not listened to or read McKenna. Who knows? He might have turned some otherwise mindless druggies into a new wave of thinkers with transcendental insights.
i label mckenna as a philosopher because he fits the bill; he was an intellectual who was able to speak about human affairs with authority. that doesn't mean he nailed everything on the head - nobody has. but you can't just write him off because a bunch of dumb ass kids swallow everything he says. all of the thinkers mentioned above have some downright whacky ideas themselves but that doesn't take away the value of what they taught in other areas.
Edited by millzy (07/18/12 11:33 AM)
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder



Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 27 days
|
Re: How does one become a great philosopher? [Re: millzy]
#16549333 - 07/18/12 11:58 AM (11 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Obviously, the fame of Socrates and his student Plato, and Plato's student Aristotle did not exactly benefit from their celebrity. Today's fame and fortune go together, but not necessarily then. Hey, I want to publish my book, and maybe even advertise it here through Amazon, but I have no illusions about making a lot of money from it, or of attracting a following. I believe that I have some experiences that are interesting and perhaps helpful to other's understanding of their own experiences. That is what I want - to communicate these experiences before they are lost, "like tears in the rain."
You make good points about McKenna, of which I am essentially in agreement. He was not particularly well organized, but then again, neither was Socrates or Plato. It probably took Plotinus and later Iamblichus to systematize Platonic sayings. I was put off when McKenna, walking around an alchemical lab in Prague, misidentified an essential piece of equipment (I have blocked it now, and I forgot exactly how he mislabeled it, but it annoyed me at the time because he was making the usual authority-sounding proclamations). Again, I have several of his books here, and it was his first book, with his brother, that showed my how to grow mushrooms back in the 1980s, so I will always have a special place in my heart for him. By academic standards, and a few philosophers I've known personally (D.G. Leahy, Bob Brier, Arthur Lothstein), he would not have been considered to be a "great philosopher."

Terrence kind of reminds me of a self-portrait I did in pencil around 1990, before I found the pic above. 
-------------------- γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself
|
MushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs



Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 2 years, 11 months
|
Re: How does one become a great philosopher? [Re: Memories]
#16549478 - 07/18/12 12:56 PM (11 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The point is that he cares more about emotional satisfaction than understanding how things work.
Do you have any evidence for this? Sure, it seems safe to assume that he cares about emotional satisfaction, but how did you determine how much he cares about how things work? 
Quote:
It is like a religion. It is a bunch of unsubstantiated assertions to help you pretend that you can transcend death.
Quote:
Yes, and this is why I believe philosophy goes hand in hand with science. Philosophy is the "love of wisdom" after all.
As much as I would like for this kind of philosophy to be the only kind of psilosophy, the truth is that psilosophy encompases delusional thinking as well, by definition. It fits all tastes and sizes and what some people consider to be a "good philosopher" others consider to be crap.
--------------------
   All this time I've loved you And never known your face All this time I've missed you And searched this human race Here is true peace Here my heart knows calm Safe in your soul Bathed in your sighs
|
Memories



Registered: 05/09/12
Posts: 10,484
Loc: Suwannee River
Last seen: 3 years, 10 months
|
Re: How does one become a great philosopher? [Re: MushroomTrip]
#16549521 - 07/18/12 01:05 PM (11 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Do you have any evidence for this? Sure, it seems safe to assume that he cares about emotional satisfaction, but how did you determine how much he cares about how things work?
You don't have to be a genius to see that Mckenna's ideas are unsubstantiated. People believe his ideas because they make them feel good.
Quote:
As much as I would like for this kind of philosophy to be the only kind of psilosophy, the truth is that psilosophy encompases delusional thinking as well, by definition. It fits all tastes and sizes and what some people consider to be a "good philosopher" others consider to be crap.
People create tautologies, so what?
|
millzy


Registered: 05/12/10
Posts: 12,409
|
|
Quote:
MarkostheGnostic said: Obviously, the fame of Socrates and his student Plato, and Plato's student Aristotle did not exactly benefit from their celebrity. Today's fame and fortune go together, but not necessarily then. Hey, I want to publish my book, and maybe even advertise it here through Amazon, but I have no illusions about making a lot of money from it, or of attracting a following. I believe that I have some experiences that are interesting and perhaps helpful to other's understanding of their own experiences. That is what I want - to communicate these experiences before they are lost, "like tears in the rain."
You make good points about McKenna, of which I am essentially in agreement. He was not particularly well organized, but then again, neither was Socrates or Plato. It probably took Plotinus and later Iamblichus to systematize Platonic sayings. I was put off when McKenna, walking around an alchemical lab in Prague, misidentified an essential piece of equipment (I have blocked it now, and I forgot exactly how he mislabeled it, but it annoyed me at the time because he was making the usual authority-sounding proclamations). Again, I have several of his books here, and it was his first book, with his brother, that showed my how to grow mushrooms back in the 1980s, so I will always have a special place in my heart for him. By academic standards, and a few philosophers I've known personally (D.G. Leahy, Bob Brier, Arthur Lothstein), he would not have been considered to be a "great philosopher."

Terrence kind of reminds me of a self-portrait I did in pencil around 1990, before I found the pic above. 

no argument against socrates' fame doing him in, but i get the impression that he viewed that as an essential part of his duty. he willingly went to his death when he could've left athens. beyond the dionysius incident i would say that plato along with the rest of the world benefited greatly from his notoriety. as far as aristotle goes, i'm not sure you can get a better gig than being the teacher of the most influential and important figure in western, if not all of human history.
that mckenna film with him in prague is still really interesting. i recall him holding some alchemical equipment at one point but i don't remember which piece he was talking about.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
|
MushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs



Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 2 years, 11 months
|
Re: How does one become a great philosopher? [Re: Memories]
#16549604 - 07/18/12 01:25 PM (11 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
You don't have to be a genius to see that Mckenna's ideas are unsubstantiated. People believe his ideas because they make them feel good.
I thought we were talking about OP, not McKenna. Was I wrong? You weren't saying that OP is more interested in emotional satisfaction than finding out how things work?
Quote:
People create tautologies, so what?
So, bullshit philosophy is philosophy too, and there' a great amount of people who consider this kind of philosophy to be good. Hence, you can't say that the best kind of philosophy is the one who relies on science as a general truth, because other people have other preferences and in order for you to be right about what kind of philosophy is the best, humanity would first have to redefine philosophy.
--------------------
   All this time I've loved you And never known your face All this time I've missed you And searched this human race Here is true peace Here my heart knows calm Safe in your soul Bathed in your sighs
|
Memories



Registered: 05/09/12
Posts: 10,484
Loc: Suwannee River
Last seen: 3 years, 10 months
|
Re: How does one become a great philosopher? [Re: MushroomTrip]
#16549617 - 07/18/12 01:28 PM (11 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I thought we were talking about OP, not McKenna. Was I wrong? You weren't saying that OP is more interested in emotional satisfaction than finding out how things work?
The OP talked about Mckenna as a great philosopher.
Quote:
So, bullshit philosophy is philosophy too, and there' a great amount of people who consider this kind of philosophy to be good. Hence, you can't say that the best kind of philosophy is the one who relies on science as a general truth, because other people have other preferences and in order for you to be right about what kind of philosophy is the best, humanity would first have to redefine philosophy.
Everyone claims the philosophy they find to be the best, for whatever reason, is true. I can define the best kind of philosophy however I want to. The whole point of this forum is to do that and then argue about it.
|
MushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs



Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 2 years, 11 months
|
Re: How does one become a great philosopher? [Re: Memories]
#16549642 - 07/18/12 01:34 PM (11 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The OP talked about Mckenna as a great philosopher.
So this, by association, makes him less interested in the truth? 
Quote:
Everyone claims the philosophy they find to be the best, for whatever reason, is true. I can define the best kind of philosophy however I want to. The whole point of this forum is to do that and then argue about it.
Of course everyone thinks that their philosophy is the best, that was my point too. You, however, by the way you expressed yourself, made it seem as if the only kind of philosophy was the one that was based in science and that other philosophies didn't even exist.
--------------------
   All this time I've loved you And never known your face All this time I've missed you And searched this human race Here is true peace Here my heart knows calm Safe in your soul Bathed in your sighs
|
millzy


Registered: 05/12/10
Posts: 12,409
|
Re: How does one become a great philosopher? [Re: Memories]
#16549653 - 07/18/12 01:37 PM (11 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
two more things:
1. mckenna is definitely around the bend with timewave zero. aristotle thinks the brain is basically a radiator that cools the body and that the heart is where thought originates. francis crick thinks consciousness is a matter of certain electrical frequencies in the neurons of the brain. none of those things are true, but you simply can't throw the baby out with the bathwater. we have yet to find a comprehensive explanation of reality and dismissing entire schools of thought is counterproductive in most cases.
2. while dismissing entire schools of thought in general is a bad idea, adopting one philosophy is also getting into dangerous ground in that it leads to dogmatism. see staunch idealist and materialist posters in this forum for shining examples of this.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
Edited by millzy (07/18/12 01:41 PM)
|
Memories



Registered: 05/09/12
Posts: 10,484
Loc: Suwannee River
Last seen: 3 years, 10 months
|
Re: How does one become a great philosopher? [Re: MushroomTrip]
#16549657 - 07/18/12 01:39 PM (11 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
So this, by association, makes him less interested in the truth?
It makes him interested in things that make him feel good. I used to think Mckenna was cool when I was 14 because psychedelic mysticism helped me cope with death.
Quote:
Of course everyone thinks that their philosophy is the best, that was my point too. You, however, by the way you expressed yourself, made it seem as if the only kind of philosophy was the one that was based in science and that other philosophies didn't even exist.
Where did I make it seem like I didn't believe other philosophies exist?
|
MushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs



Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 2 years, 11 months
|
Re: How does one become a great philosopher? [Re: Memories]
#16549685 - 07/18/12 01:47 PM (11 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
It makes him interested in things that make him feel good. I used to think Mckenna was cool when I was 14 because psychedelic mysticism helped me cope with death.
So if he is interested in things that make him feel good he can't also be interested in the truth? Are you still interested in things that make you feel good, despite them changing from new age crap to science?
Quote:
Where did I make it seem like I didn't believe other philosophies exist?
When I asked if the job of philosophy was to describe the universe in the most realistic way, you said "Yes, and this is why I believe philosophy goes hand in hand with science. Philosophy is the "love of wisdom" after all."
--------------------
   All this time I've loved you And never known your face All this time I've missed you And searched this human race Here is true peace Here my heart knows calm Safe in your soul Bathed in your sighs
|
Memories



Registered: 05/09/12
Posts: 10,484
Loc: Suwannee River
Last seen: 3 years, 10 months
|
Re: How does one become a great philosopher? [Re: MushroomTrip]
#16549725 - 07/18/12 01:56 PM (11 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
So if he is interested in things that make him feel good he can't also be interested in the truth? Are you still interested in things that make you feel good, despite them changing from new age crap to science?
The fact that he views Mckenna as a great philosopher makes it seem likely that he is more interested in coping with death anxiety than having the most realistic explanation of things.
I made myself miserable for many years as a result of caring about what was realistic as opposed to what made me feel good.
Quote:
When I asked if the job of philosophy was to describe the universe in the most realistic way, you said "Yes, and this is why I believe philosophy goes hand in hand with science. Philosophy is the "love of wisdom" after all."
How does explaining my philosophy imply that I don't believe other philosophies exist?
|
MushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs



Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 2 years, 11 months
|
Re: How does one become a great philosopher? [Re: Memories]
#16549760 - 07/18/12 02:07 PM (11 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The fact that he views Mckenna as a great philosopher makes it seem likely that he is more interested in coping with death anxiety than having the most realistic explanation of things.
It might seem more likely to you, but that doesn't have to mean in any way that's the truth.
Quote:
I made myself miserable for many years as a result of caring about what was realistic as opposed to what made me feel good.
Bullshit. There's always benefit in adopting or maintaining a new ideology, so I'm almost positive that you chose scientific thinking over bullshit because you felt it was much more beneficial. My guess is that if you would have felt so miserable as a result of this change, you would have went back to being McKenna's fan. 
Quote:
How does explaining my philosophy imply that I don't believe other philosophies exist?
Well, by the way you expressed your thoughts it made it seem as if this is what you were thinking. Instead of saying that you preferred scientific philosophy, you said that the role of philosophy was to describe the universe in the most realistic way. As a fact.
--------------------
   All this time I've loved you And never known your face All this time I've missed you And searched this human race Here is true peace Here my heart knows calm Safe in your soul Bathed in your sighs
|
Memories



Registered: 05/09/12
Posts: 10,484
Loc: Suwannee River
Last seen: 3 years, 10 months
|
Re: How does one become a great philosopher? [Re: MushroomTrip]
#16549769 - 07/18/12 02:09 PM (11 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bullshit. There's always benefit in adopting or maintaining a new ideology, so I'm almost positive that you chose scientific thinking over bullshit because you felt it was much more beneficial. My guess is that if you would have felt so miserable as a result of this change, you would have went back to being McKenna's fan.
The only benefit was that I felt it was closer to truth. I had always been a happy kid, but when I decided a materialist world view was more raional I became depressed and suicidal. I don't care if you believe me.
|
MushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs



Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 2 years, 11 months
|
Re: How does one become a great philosopher? [Re: Memories]
#16549773 - 07/18/12 02:10 PM (11 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Me either
--------------------
   All this time I've loved you And never known your face All this time I've missed you And searched this human race Here is true peace Here my heart knows calm Safe in your soul Bathed in your sighs
|
Cactilove
Controversial Mystic



Registered: 02/17/11
Posts: 4,826
|
Re: How does one become a great philosopher? [Re: MushroomTrip]
#16550656 - 07/18/12 05:08 PM (11 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The fact that he views Mckenna as a great philosopher makes it seem likely that he is more interested in coping with death anxiety than having the most realistic explanation of things.
My Death anxiety? I accept death as a natural process of life, you can't have one without the other. Do I have death anxiety, yes of course. I believe its goes down as deep as a physiological level. Getting around death or transcending it? I don't believe thats possible . accepting it, embracing it? very possible. What is transcending death anyway?
-------------------- Orgone Conclusion...Bringing OTD to PS&P since 2007.
|
KGB Is Go
Сталкер



Registered: 09/09/10
Posts: 322
Loc: VIC
Last seen: 3 years, 9 months
|
Re: How does one become a great philosopher? [Re: Cactilove]
#16551213 - 07/18/12 07:25 PM (11 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
The thread's gone a bit off track..
But, Memories, you seem to be projecting your experience with McKenna onto others. I love listening to McKenna. Perhaps I'm deluding myself, but death anxiety is not something I've ever tied to Terence nor thought about as a result of listening to him. Am I missing something?
--------------------
"The guy went axe-happy on a trout farm, he killed 60 fish."
|
millzy


Registered: 05/12/10
Posts: 12,409
|
Re: How does one become a great philosopher? [Re: KGB Is Go]
#16553895 - 07/19/12 10:30 AM (11 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
mckenna's a great speaker. i really enjoy his stuff about art and literature much more than psychedelic culture. his finnegan's wake lecture is really neat.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder



Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 27 days
|
Re: How does one become a great philosopher? [Re: millzy]
#16554202 - 07/19/12 11:54 AM (11 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Ancient Egyptians, Ramana Maharshi, and Vajrayana Buddhism all place the 'seat of mind' in the Heart Center (corresponding with the organ, but not identical with its physical nature). The Heart is similarly, the Sun in alchemy, whereas the Brain is the Moon. In all major mystical schools (even within Christianity) the Heart is Solar, the Moon is Lunar, Blood and Water, Light and Reflection. It might be that undifferentiated Pure Consciousness does constellate at the Heart, while the Brain 'prismatically' splits that undifferentiated Pure Consciousness into its various conscious and unconscious functions through the unique cellular architecture of neuronal structures. Analogously, quartz crystals resonate at precise frequencies, Germanium diodes amplify omnipresent radio signals, semiconductors account for some of the 'intelligence' of our computers. A theory that you will no doubt consider "around the bend," is in Dr. Masaro Emoto's Hidden Messages in Water book, which suggests that water has the ability to respond to directed human emotions.
I have long entertained the idea that I gleaned from Eastern philosophies as well as the work of C.G. Jung with Wolfgang Pauli that suggests that the flip side of the space-time continuum is Pure Consciousness. If simultaneities occur, say telepathically or clairvoyantly, there should be a tiny time-lag between the thinker and the receiver, IF thought is considered to be energy like radio waves. Then, owing to the constant speed of light, there could not be perfect simultaneity. But, if space-time were rife with consciousness, which transcends space-time (consciousness has no extension in space, and perhaps no duration in time, suggesting an eternal nature), then that changes everything. Einstein said that the attainment of light speed would result in the traveling object attaining "infinite mass." It would become the entire universe or be one with the universe. It might not mean physically one, but psychically one with the universe. This appeals to my panentheistic notion of Deity, Present at each point of space time, and not separate from our consciousness, but the source of our consciousness in which "we live and move and have our being."
-------------------- γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself
|
millzy


Registered: 05/12/10
Posts: 12,409
|
|
Quote:
MarkostheGnostic said: Ancient Egyptians, Ramana Maharshi, and Vajrayana Buddhism all place the 'seat of mind' in the Heart Center (corresponding with the organ, but not identical with its physical nature). The Heart is similarly, the Sun in alchemy, whereas the Brain is the Moon. In all major mystical schools (even within Christianity) the Heart is Solar, the Moon is Lunar, Blood and Water, Light and Reflection. It might be that undifferentiated Pure Consciousness does constellate at the Heart, while the Brain 'prismatically' splits that undifferentiated Pure Consciousness into its various conscious and unconscious functions through the unique cellular architecture of neuronal structures. Analogously, quartz crystals resonate at precise frequencies, Germanium diodes amplify omnipresent radio signals, semiconductors account for some of the 'intelligence' of our computers. A theory that you will no doubt consider "around the bend," is in Dr. Masaro Emoto's Hidden Messages in Water book, which suggests that water has the ability to respond to directed human emotions.
I have long entertained the idea that I gleaned from Eastern philosophies as well as the work of C.G. Jung with Wolfgang Pauli that suggests that the flip side of the space-time continuum is Pure Consciousness. If simultaneities occur, say telepathically or clairvoyantly, there should be a tiny time-lag between the thinker and the receiver, IF thought is considered to be energy like radio waves. Then, owing to the constant speed of light, there could not be perfect simultaneity. But, if space-time were rife with consciousness, which transcends space-time (consciousness has no extension in space, and perhaps no duration in time, suggesting an eternal nature), then that changes everything. Einstein said that the attainment of light speed would result in the traveling object attaining "infinite mass." It would become the entire universe or be one with the universe. It might not mean physically one, but psychically one with the universe. This appeals to my panentheistic notion of Deity, Present at each point of space time, and not separate from our consciousness, but the source of our consciousness in which "we live and move and have our being."
it's my impression that aristotle is being a lot more concrete when he makes those claims about the heart whereas your examples are a bit more esoteric and abstract. perhaps a better example of aristotle's false claims is the assertion that heavier things fall faster than light things, which has obviously been overturned by classical physics. my point is that it's unwise to write off the entire corpus of any titanic thinker simply because of claims that have since been overturned by objective science.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
|
|