I think both points you make are 'razor sharp' Orn. The 'Razor' is, of course, a heuristic, a bit like those finger-breaking rules of thumb in electro-magnetics. The notion of 'active hunger' is, to me, Kantian, an admission about the pursuit of Reason perhaps as much driven as the 'sex drive' (more of a dribble in my case these days).
I find myself wanting to know more about how this 'stuff' works for you Bill (forgive the shorthand 'stuff'). I don't think you'll mind me mentioning a private missive between us here. I took your offer 'not to bother me with godswank' rather kindly (on both our parts), though a misinterpretation of what my feelings are. My fears on this concern that form of political correctness that prevents dialogue through an almost totalitarian insistence on 'manners'. I am, in fact, very interested in how a range of imagery you hint at affects you, others and myself. What I would hope we could get at and to is the shared difference. It seems pretty clear we could often not force a paper-width between us on what is happening politically in the world. The razor disappears in philosophy as we discover it lacks the clarity its metaphor suggests. My view is that there is something deep and worthwhile in surfacing what we already share in tolerating each other at all - though 'tolerate' is the wrong word in some of its use - certain forms of tolerance are deeply patronising. To make my point, I might regard your exploits in the 'backwaters of traditional failures' rather as my grandson's obsessions for electric guitar and video games, something not for me, but to be put up with in the greater cause of love! I don't, and wouldn't, but all kinds of possibilities could be hypothesised in either direction. One could write science fiction in which varying characters end up on the same quest, from ostensibly different perspectives. Our different ways might well reveal themselves as springing from the same 'origins', only seen as we recognise we have been sharing the same light. It is easy enough to write of the 'godswanker'. Dawkins cops for a lot of cheap jokes about being 'a fundamentalist atheist' or 'a Jehova who missed the witnessing'. Somewhere on a Trobriand Island, a man with antipodean accent will be converting cargo cultists worshipping 'John Frum' to seventh day adventism. We might sneer that the world is full of the cargo cultists of capitalism, though 'sneering' might be one of the 'five hindrances'. We can, of course, turn it on ourselves and experience what is left after ridicule. Some of the most deeply patronising and self-unaware behaviour I have witnessed has come from social workers and managers I have taught participative techniques to in an attempt to try and get them to let people really form their own decisions. The Eastern Europeans often used the phrases 'the missionaries of management come East' and 'the apparatchecks become the entrepreneurcheks', recognising the very religious nature of the preached 'transition economics' we were paid to deliver. Rather than preach the wonders of the West I have always tried to describe the multiple and failed models in use. I 'accuse' you of none of this Bill, other than some telling of it as is. We had 'satanic abuse' farces on both sides of our pond. Typically, 'experts' from 'abroad' were brought in and swooned authorities who should have known better. There is always this worry in me about 'religion' - a term in use for me that includes capitalism, management theories and any variety of robed figures (including lab coats). I hope I include myself. I certainly recognise the sermonic! There are questions as to whether even very good arguments from Alan Wallace amount to as much as an episode of 'The Champions'. The issues of what we might share more deeply do not lie in books of manuals, yet also seem not to lie in a simple acquiescence to peace. There are questions on what we can teach without using sales tricks - many are evident in this piece from Alan. The question is about what we can trust. On 22 Nov, 05:01, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > I share your idealism Neil… even when it came to Occham….until I > noticed that when applied to itself, the razor disappears. > > For me, the notion of ‘personal development’ converts to the process > of the active hunger for and pursuit of truth with the function of > transcendence producing a unified, larger and more clarified result. > Then the process begins all over…cyclically. > > On Nov 21, 7:36 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Freud once said something akin to 'methodologists get caught up in > > polishing their glasses and never looking through them'. I often > > wonder what others do in respect of 'reading' Orn. I am not at all > > 'bookish' and yet am often accused of being so. I've said before that > > much of this kind of material is available in philosophy generally. > > There is too much for one lifetime even in that opus unless we are > > trying for 'person development' (or whatever other term). One might > > say that the nominalism of Occham was shattering and that some turn in > > modern philosophy (or ancient in new use) might be equally so. I > > don't really expect much in this sense, but admit the possibilities. > > The guess I'm working with is that technology may open us up to less > > nastiness by letting more people, perhaps the vast majority, be > > together with what they find. > > > On 22 Nov, 02:17, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > For the record, I do not “follow Wallace” although, as a true > > > scientist, I have experimented when it comes to mind with him and > > > others. In addition, he is a wonderful language instructor even though > > > my brain isn’t so inclined. I retain little to no Tibetan from the > > > 80s. > > > > And, Neil, in one sense I agree with you about the traditional > > > background and apparent complexity. Yet, as Alan presents the analogy > > > of graduate coursework, it just takes that amount of homework. Of > > > course, Buddhism itself has forecast the moment in the future of its > > > entire demise. > > > > I still remember an inquiry from a fellow member of an Inner Light > > > Conference ask HHDL about a shorter method and watching HHDL tear up > > > and say something to the effect of “I wish there were.” A surprising > > > insight, admission and answer all in one! > > > > Overall, I fully embrace pragmatism in all such areas of inquiry. So > > > far, what I have found is what I have found. > > > > On Nov 21, 4:45 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > To be brutally honest I find the study of this kind of stuff a waste, > > > > though one can waste around and learn and there are much worse things > > > > being done. The science that has tended to interest me could share > > > > some of the spirit of trying to find something worth discovering in > > > > virtue and integrity but I have great difficulty with anything that > > > > requires so much tradition of any kind. I think the world is barking > > > > mad and would welcome something more peaceful and at one about a > > > > practice of peace. I think, for now, we have missed the chance and > > > > need some minimalist rules around which to try again. We have made > > > > this extremely difficult through denials of fact in our praxis. I > > > > tend towards pragmatism in this and that we have to accept limitations > > > > in human reasoning on the basis of a factual history. There is as big > > > > a mistake in the separation of fact and value as there is in the > > > > bifurcation of nature. > > > > > On 21 Nov, 22:26, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I for one would not follow wallace > > > > > I do not know any other way of putting it > > > > > Allan > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 10:07 PM, archytas <[email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > Sorry Orn - I lose spellchecking with IE for some reason. My > > > > > > general > > > > > > sense of 'out there' is that it is operationally defined and then > > > > > > this > > > > > > is forgotten, or perhaps it is forgotten that not all others > > > > > > referring > > > > > > to such a definition have forgotten. > > > > > > > On 21 Nov, 15:24, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > I am curious about the work this organisation does : > > > > > >http://www.mbaproject.org/ > > > > > > > ! > > > > > > > > Just felt like asking, without starting a new thread. " MBA " > > > > > > > stands > > > > > > > for : Mind Body Awareness. They seem to be into actions that > > > > > > > impact > > > > > > > the individual and the society, including the ' management ' and > > > > > > > institutional fraternity. > > > > > > > > That they are doing it, if you may confirm, means a million times > > > > > > > more > > > > > > > than the fact that it may amount to nothing much. > > > > > > > > On Nov 21, 8:06 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Without knowing what is meant by “rekection” it is difficult to > > > > > > > > comment. However, in all cases, I find what most call “out > > > > > > > > there” to > > > > > > > > *all* be at once here, universal and neither inside nor outside. > > > > > > > > > On Nov 21, 6:45 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I take a rather different route Orn, as you know. Something > > > > > > > > > like > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > is considered in the Kantian sublime and I do know quite a > > > > > > > > > few people > > > > > > > > > who are not 'adherents' but still use these techniques as a > > > > > > framework, > > > > > > > > > even some more 'magical-astrological' ones. I have to say I > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > experienced a great deal 'unusual' in such company, including > > > > > > > > > great > > > > > > > > > relief to be amongst people managing to care without my > > > > > > > > > angst. I > > > > > > > > > strongly believe now that it is too difficult for us to > > > > > > > > > commune. > > > > > > > > > > My sense of much of what you post feels like something of a > > > > > > > > > rekection > > > > > > > > > of the 'out there'. I immediately agree and yet wonder about > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > nature of the descriptor 'out there'. I wonder in very naive > > > > > > > > > ways > > > > > > > > > about 'why we are here'. This leads me to some rather > > > > > > > > > different > > > > > > > > > frameworks. > > > > > > > > > > On 21 Nov, 13:22, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > A new article by Alan Wallace having to do with numerous > > > > > > > > > > important > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > informative instructions for achieving one pointed > > > > > > > > > > concentration > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > associated states of consciousness with the goal of helping > > > > > > humanity. > > > > > > > > > > Here one will find indications for the necessary > > > > > > > > > > conditions, the > > > > > > > > > > necessary prerequisites, the actual practices involved > > > > > > > > > > along with > > > > > > an > > > > > > > > > > erudite presentation of historical advice from the most > > > > > > > > > > recognized > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > realized personages involved in this scientific praxis over > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > span > > > > > > > > > > of the last 2,500 years. > > > > > > > > > > > Mr. Wallace who is proficient in the Tibetan and Sanskrit > > > > > > > > > > languages > > > > > > > > > > and who has spent decades seeking and receiving personal > > > > > > instruction > > > > > > > > > > from masters of true lineages for his personal practice is > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > qualified to share this sage advice. His foundation in both > > > > > > > > > > contemplative and scientific practices aids him in his > > > > > > > > > > ability to > > > > > > > > > > share insights and recommendations to those of us in today’s > > > > > > western > > > > > > > > > > societies. > > > > > > > > > > > His ability to clearly present a full practice and solution > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > humanity in areas that normally are seen as being > > > > > > > > > > inscrutable is a > > > > > > > > > > rare and extremely valuable quality. Those who are serious > > > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > search for actual and lasting solutions for the global, > > > > > > > > > > social and > > > > > > > > > > personal issues of today would be well advised to take the > > > > > > > > > > time to > > > > > > > > > > read study and apply his wisdom. > > > > > > > > > > > Although this is a relatively short article published in > > > > > > > > > > Tricycle, > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > contemporary magazine, rarely is there such a wealth of > > > > > > > > > > practical, > > > > > > > > > > well founded and accessible advice found today in any > > > > > > > > > > format or > > > > > > venue. > > > > > > > > > > It is an excellent way to gain the foundation necessary for > > > > > > > > > > understanding what is involved in entering such an > > > > > > > > > > important and > > > > > > > > > > necessary path today. > > > > > > > > > > > For the benefit of all: > > > > > > >http://www.sbinstitute.com/PDF%20AW.org/Wallace_WithinYouWithoutYou.p... > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > > > > > Groups > > > > > > ""Minds Eye"" group. > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > > > > [email protected]<minds-eye%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups > > > > > > .com> > > > > > > . > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=. > > > > > > -- > > > > > ( > > > > > ) > > > > > I_D Allan- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=.
