Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   North Spore Bulk Substrate

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5  [ show all ]
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,539
Re: IF YOU GAZE LONG INTO THE ABYSS, THE ABYSS WILL GAZE BACK INTO YOU [Re: blingbling]
    #23753605 - 10/19/16 11:14 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

what if the chair is looking back at you


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: IF YOU GAZE LONG INTO THE ABYSS, THE ABYSS WILL GAZE BACK INTO YOU [Re: redgreenvines]
    #23753956 - 10/20/16 03:46 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Then you've probably done enough shrooms for the night and its time to chill :mushroom2:


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePenelope_Tree
Shamanic Panic
 User Gallery


Registered: 07/31/09
Posts: 8,535
Loc: magic sugarcastle
Re: IF YOU GAZE LONG INTO THE ABYSS, THE ABYSS WILL GAZE BACK INTO YOU [Re: blingbling] * 1
    #23756283 - 10/20/16 09:47 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

redgreenvines said:
what if the chair is looking back at you




Then you are Sartre. :lol:



To bring it full circle, I think we have moved from the post-modern age into an ideological age, or maybe  an "identifying age" is a better way to say it. There is so much connective potential between modern humans and so many technological advances that have made it possible for us to do things that once seemed impossible. But there is not an ancient narrative to guide us thru these times. Many are struggling in the sea of modern illusion, holding fast to certain ancient narratives which only serve to further alienate them from the present. God is not Dead. The conceptualization of God that was popularized/formalized/secularized and spread for thousands of years is, quite possibly, dead, or maybe just not serving us in the way it once was. The Ground of Being does not cease to exist. It's just that we need a new narrative which serves us all.

You said it yourself, "the trauma of secularism is the driving force behind our modern identity politics and the increasing political polarisation." I would agree.


--------------------
full blown human


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: IF YOU GAZE LONG INTO THE ABYSS, THE ABYSS WILL GAZE BACK INTO YOU [Re: Penelope_Tree]
    #23756300 - 10/20/16 09:53 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

we need a new narrative which serves us all

Sounds pretty facist to me. Think about it, Hitler would totally agree with this.

Honestly I just don't see a way out.


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePenelope_Tree
Shamanic Panic
 User Gallery


Registered: 07/31/09
Posts: 8,535
Loc: magic sugarcastle
Re: IF YOU GAZE LONG INTO THE ABYSS, THE ABYSS WILL GAZE BACK INTO YOU [Re: blingbling]
    #23756353 - 10/20/16 10:14 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

blingbling said:
we need a new narrative which serves us all

Sounds pretty facist to me. Think about it, Hitler would totally agree with this.

Honestly I just don't see a way out.





:strokebeard: That's interesting...


Except that fascism is a far-right ideology that militarized entire societies, and, if you read what I wrote, that's not what I was advocating at all.


--------------------
full blown human


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHobozen
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/03/11
Posts: 10,634
Loc: Flag
Re: IF YOU GAZE LONG INTO THE ABYSS, THE ABYSS WILL GAZE BACK INTO YOU [Re: blingbling]
    #23756489 - 10/20/16 11:09 PM (7 years, 3 months ago)



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
Re: IF YOU GAZE LONG INTO THE ABYSS, THE ABYSS WILL GAZE BACK INTO YOU [Re: Penelope_Tree]
    #23756874 - 10/21/16 03:16 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Penelope_Tree said:
Quote:

blingbling said:
we need a new narrative which serves us all

Sounds pretty facist to me. Think about it, Hitler would totally agree with this.

Honestly I just don't see a way out.





:strokebeard: That's interesting...


Except that fascism is a far-right ideology that militarized entire societies, and, if you read what I wrote, that's not what I was advocating at all.




Yeah I wasn't trying to pin that on you. I was just trying to point out how dangerous this stuff is. I think it might be better to just come to terms with our alienation from society, the universe, all things that we attempt to make extensions of ourselves. It's a lonely way to look at things, but I think it's the only way to stay true to oneself.


--------------------
Kupo said:
let's fuel the robots with psilocybin.

cez said:
everyone should smoke dmt for religion.

dustinthewind13 said:
euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building.

White Beard said:
if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
Re: IF YOU GAZE LONG INTO THE ABYSS, THE ABYSS WILL GAZE BACK INTO YOU [Re: blingbling]
    #23757019 - 10/21/16 05:22 AM (7 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Penelope_Tree said:
Quote:

redgreenvines said:
what if the chair is looking back at you




Then you are Sartre. :lol:



To bring it full circle, I think we have moved from the post-modern age into an ideological age, or maybe  an "identifying age" is a better way to say it. There is so much connective potential between modern humans and so many technological advances that have made it possible for us to do things that once seemed impossible. But there is not an ancient narrative to guide us thru these times. Many are struggling in the sea of modern illusion, holding fast to certain ancient narratives which only serve to further alienate them from the present. God is not Dead. The conceptualization of God that was popularized/formalized/secularized and spread for thousands of years is, quite possibly, dead, or maybe just not serving us in the way it once was. The Ground of Being does not cease to exist. It's just that we need a new narrative which serves us all.

You said it yourself, "the trauma of secularism is the driving force behind our modern identity politics and the increasing political polarisation." I would agree.




I always feel a little crazy writing so much on web forums, especially since my interest is in a kind of teutonic traditionalism of philosophy... but I think I have a response.

Maybe we need to just look to what we aim at?

This could be practical, and could come before particular identifications. There is a passage I have always found interesting in Martin Heidegger's letter on Humanism:

"We are still far from pondering the essence of action decisively
enough. We view action only as causing an effect. The actuality of the effect is valued according to its utility. But the essence of action is accomplishment. To accomplish means to unfold something into the fullness of its essence, to lead-it forth into this fullness -producere.

Therefore only what already is can really be accomplished. But what "is" above all is being. Thinking accomplishes the relation of being to the essence of the human being - It does not make or cause the relation. Thinking brings this relation to being solely as something handed over to thought itself from being(...) "

Martin Heidegger; Letter on Humanism.

Martin Heidegger is one philosopher anyone would be right to call obscure, but this doesn't mean he is necessarily wrong about everything. And he may have been politically naive, and may have made mistakes, and may just kind of been a bad person, but what he says isn't necessarily all wrong for that. (Just saying before I commit).

I'd say we need at least a sensibility for human history today, to be aware of our generation, and its roots and what it actually is. We should be able to view our horizon.

A sensibility doesn't mean we need to identify with something, poetically or otherwise. It is a general way of "being", existence, which we live by, I'd say. To say something at a moment of time, in history, among others, to stand for something, not knowing if it will be understood, might be what Heidegger means by unfolding, in one sense, from a point of existence. Well I am having a difficult time putting this...

Actually, this letter was an open letter of Heidegger's on Sartre's Existentialism is a Humanism. (also, as additional point of interest: this was also Heidegger's own attempt just after the second world war, to address his political identifications, more or less sincerely.)

As I read him, Heidegger seems to disputes Sartre's sense of individuality as something based principally in subjectivism, which is leveling the departure of "existentiality" to a matter of perception, (He calls Sartre's statement "existence precedes essence" a metaphysics, in a related way). I think his point basically, is that existence might be a step back, but in a generality, in a way of being in the world, maybe in "perspective". This is a different kind of distance from particular truth, than subjectivism potentially. The existential turn may be called subjective, for standing for a difference in perspective, but what could be said is existence is not necessarily primarily grounded in that principle of ideal representations from the beginning.

A good way to put it pretty simply, (and in terms Sartre would agree with, if not in details) is that a common or general experience is possibly found in individuality. It is possible to speak to this, although we are skeptical today, maybe most of all of the likes of someone like Heidegger, who denied subjectivism as the basis of departure. Heidegger is not alone in this though. He is actually paying a tribute. You can definitely see a resemblance in his statement and this one, of Aristotle's:

"Every art and every inquiry, and similarly every action and pursuit, is thought to aim at some good; and for this reason the good has rightly been declared to be that at which all things aim. But a certain difference is found among ends; some are activities, others are products apart from the activities that produce them."

Aristotle; Nicomachean Ethics.

If I seek something, whether in thought or act, it is good to me. Any thing I am basically conscious of, tends to present itself in ends, which according to Aristotle, it is right in some sense to call good. If anyone asked, in terms of general arguments, it may be difficult to justify this good beyond myself, and my interests, and that may be an issue that is brought up today and typically leveled to. But then, it is also spontaneous. It is possible even to somewhat recognize that in Aristotle's argument it is above all difficult to step out of a general human way of being; of rationale, or thought process; of end seeking, of desire, in things good to us individually or collectively. They are a stream. So any contradiction to this proposal in general, in a common basis, that we "tend to seek some good", is also just as difficult, if not more difficult to level. Aristotle's argument tends to stand in a sort of different place modern people are not accustomed to, nonetheless though, as subsequently it becomes what we are automatically skeptical as agenda, or ideology.

For Plato as well as Aristotle though, first principles of rationale, would be not necessarily always be in seeking and willing truth, but the good. Also, the good, if practicable in this sense, doesn't just mean the utility of actions, or some an evolutionary tendency to self preserve, even if it "is" at the same time these things which modern people are also tending to level to in their own theories. "The good" to the Greeks, meant something in general to the world. To use Aristotle's words, (which were in some clarification to Plato) "some" form of good doesn't mean a universal good, but it doesn't equate in that generality to a necessary lack of a particular claim either. This is the whole approach of Aristote's ethics. It seems to me, we should be able to see this, as a general departure too.

Quote:


Oh, those Greeks! They knew how to live: what is needed for that is to stop bravely at the surface, the fold, the skin; to worship appearance, to believe in shapes, tones, words - in the whole Olympus of appearance! Those Greeks were superficial - out of profundity! And is not this precisely what we are coming back to, we daredevils of the spirit who have climbed the highest and most dangerous peak of current thought and looked around from up there, looked down from up there? Are we not just in this respect - Greeks? Worshippers of shapes, tones, words? And therefore - artists?

Nietzsche; The Gay Science




Maybe we do not always have fresh sprouts, the grounds of such greek origins, but it is a simple thing to temper Aristotle into the form of argument we can relate to. Aristotle can be appropriated. Maybe a modern interpretation of Aristotle would have to admit the good, the accomplishing, is always subject to some degree skepticism, what with the degree of interrelation, and cognitivism (a mentality that effectively flows through intertubes) of modern people? Or maybe we have to recognize particularly cynical baselines, like "one always acts in their own interest", all the way on the end of this spectrum. Ayn Rand said she loved "Aristotle" for instance (but it is doubtful she read well.) It is true, maybe, a person and another person may have different ends, and so different ideas of good. This may be leveled to a personal interest, and the way we are in the world from that, may be that we are all each trying to capitalize on our particular ends.

But speaking for Aristotle himself, why call out that possible difference between people first, when a difference in ends, is first of all different to oneself; like the difference between something immediate, in a fork, and down the road, diverging in the yellow wood nearby, or something on the horizon? A "difference in ends" as qualifying the good, in other words, is not subjective or private, but in the world. Maybe each step is an end, a decision one has to agree with oneself on; if it is worth it, if the way is a long way. Why not begin there, and work outward? This human "tendency" to seek good, may be pluralist, but it precedes the narrative or ideology too.

Aristotle would have a concrete example. He says one can make a horse bridle for the sake of the horserider, and do a good job of it. One can do it for the sake of an exchange for goods. One may do it for the sake of art, or for the rider as well, which is a nice thing. These ends do not necessarily disagree with the former, they are different possible ends we may think of though. One may make a horse bridle for the sake of an even higher ideal, as well, for instance, for the strategic battle horse riders go to, and many subordinate acts may contribute to this. So it's true, many people may look to the same horizon, or pool together that way. One may abstain from making horsebridles, and a way of life for the same reason, in the same view too. This is all in a matter of difference in ends, in the world, paths that unfold. They can certainly be something fought over, but again, who is one who begins to find consistency and agreement, and discipline in him or herself?

Maybe Heidegger's contemplations make a bit more sense in this light. I would say, when it is all said and done, the first matter of difference in ends, is not about something subjective, in whether people agree with your opinion, in your perspective, but in whether you agree with yourself, and live by this. This is spontaneous to being. When a path diverges you choose what you do, and sometimes there is no moral, either in truth, or social norm or even to oneself in fact. You can always look back, and think I should have done this or that, but hindsight is always 20/20 right? So what is looking forward? Sometimes there is not much a reason, but it is always because a human being lives to seek.

It would be good to see a natural economy or a simple and practical "function" to virtuous acts, in the world, that begin in self sufficiency. The ancient greeks felt there was something to this, as much as Henry David Thoreau. The virtue of an eye is to see, and of a blade to cut, and again, this is in and of the world. Maybe they are not universal or ultimate goodness, but things tend to pool together. What are these virtues worth; especially the more important ones, and the human ones?

If I am reading Heidegger, an actual nazi philosopher, I consider that his moral failings do not mean he, was wrong in all things. He was a good philosopher. His emphasis on existentiality, or a general authenticity in the world, is in on point, even if he got carried away in narratives and identifications. Existence is opening to the general and common horizon of a world, and living by it, in his case or mine, I figure.

Aristotle is proof, that practical reasoning phronesis, thinking in means and ends, is more than just cleverness, or the ability to get what one wants, or ideological agenda we should always be skeptical of, but something with "something" to it, actually in the world. We seek ends essentially, the good, more or less given the individual, not just in utility, but in accomplishment. Practical wisdom is a matter of working these things out.

"If, then, there is some end of the things we do, which we desire for its own sake (everything else being desired for the sake of this), and if we do not choose everything for the sake of something else (for at that rate the process would go on to infinity, so that our desire would be empty and vain), clearly this must be the good and the chief good. Will not the knowledge of it, then, have a great influence on life? Shall we not, like archers who have a mark to aim at, be more likely to hit upon what is right?"

Aristotle, on happiness (eudomonia); Nicomachean Ethics

Anyway, apologies to go on, but my question would be this: What precedes narrative, in certain ways, that we may take as narrative, or as general awareness? How about Plato's Idea, before ideology? How about Aristotle's good as skillful means, and excellence, before going to war over a moral dispute? And do traditions conceal where they come from, like in foliage, where they branch and reach outwardly, as we follow? Where is the strong trunk, or the root behind all this? Well, I just liked that meditative idea of ground of being, and thought I might say something.

:sun:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5  [ show all ]

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   North Spore Bulk Substrate


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* the abyss, and why I'm no longer seeking
( 1 2 all )
Sophistic Radiance 2,606 31 07/19/08 06:21 PM
by numonkei
* Aristotle Noetical 2,396 18 10/14/07 12:19 AM
by backfromthedead
* Aristotle's definition of happiness: is wealth necessary? deCypher 2,006 15 11/29/11 05:38 PM
by deCypher
* Aristotle VoidOfsPg 1,074 9 10/20/06 07:54 PM
by shroomydan
* The Substance of the Abyss: An Exploration of Postmodern Nihilism
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
blingbling 3,554 80 07/24/12 11:44 PM
by 10thousand
* Why, Aristotle? Sclorch 1,536 18 10/13/02 10:01 AM
by xganon
* Would Aristotle Support the Occupy Movement? TheChillMovement 560 14 11/22/11 02:21 PM
by Icelander
* Aristotle's Final Causation Patisotagami 507 8 12/04/09 07:14 AM
by Lakefingers

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
1,822 topic views. 2 members, 8 guests and 3 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.022 seconds spending 0.006 seconds on 14 queries.