On Monday, May 13, 2019 at 1:23:22 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 11 May 2019, at 08:13, Philip Thrift <[email protected] <javascript:>> > wrote: > > > > https://aeon.co/ideas/how-the-dualism-of-descartes-ruined-our-mental-health > <https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Faeon.co%2Fideas%2Fhow-the-dualism-of-descartes-ruined-our-mental-health&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNHE2JiWV3LHmz8TKy5ZflJKDY5x1Q> > ... > Nature was thereby drained of her inner life, rendered a deaf and blind > apparatus of indifferent and value-free law, and humankind was faced with a > world of inanimate, meaningless matter, upon which it projected its psyche > – its aliveness, meaning and purpose – only in fantasy. > ... > The bifurcation of mind and nature was at the root of immeasurable secular > progress – medical and technological advance, the rise of individual rights > and social justice, to name just a few. It also protected us all from being > bound up in the inherent uncertainty and flux of nature. It gave us a > certain omnipotence – just as it gave science empirical control over nature > – and most of us readily accept, and willingly spend, the inheritance > bequeathed by it, and rightly so. > > In the face of an indifferent and unresponsive world that neglects to > render our experience meaningful outside of our own minds – for > nature-as-mechanism is powerless to do this – > > > > Yes, nature does not even exist as mechanism, so the notion of > “nature-as-mechanism” is globally non sensical, yet locally, it works for > person supported by highly probable computations, but nature becomes a > projection, like in a dream. > > > > > our minds have been left fixated on empty representations of a world that > was once its source and being. > > > That is due to the reductionist conception of machine and number. Today, > we can defeat it, mathematically. > > > > > All we have, if we are lucky to have them, are therapists and parents who > try to take on what is, in reality, and given the magnitude of the loss, an > impossible task. > > > The loss is due to the separation of theology from science, and the > impeaching of the fundamental questioning for a long period. > That has led to the separation of human sciences and exact science, making > them both into pseudo-metaphysics and pseudo-religion. Then we see only the > “superficial” technologies, without understanding of what they implies. To > separate science and theologies is a con artist trick to steal your money, > and in passing, your soul. > > When “equated” with the machine, the negative pessimist will say, “oh > damned I am only a machine”, but the positive optimistic will say, “nice, > so machine can be as nice as I am”. > > The interesting thing is only that this can be tested. Mechanism has > observable consequences. > > Bruno > > > > > > ... > > "How did we ever get the notion of the mind as something distinct from the > body? Why did this bad idea enter our culture?” > > -- Richard Rorty > https://news.stanford.edu/news/2005/april13/rorty-041305.html > > > > > > The problem (aligning with the above article by psychotherapist James Barnes [ https://www.linkedin.com/in/james-barnes-msc-ma-90766b159/ ]) is that there is no (A) mind *and* the body (or matter), there are (B) experiences *of* the body (matter).
Speaking in the terminology of (A) has harmed mental health. (Now one can be an experience-monist psychotherapist - everything is experience - but then the therapist has to explain to the patient why they need a particular drug prescription.) @philipthrift -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/a5995d0a-e1f2-4e6f-9af6-20865333abee%40googlegroups.com.
