Well, it isn't so much 'my' concept as I don't like what
transcedentalism stands for.
tran·scen·den·tal·ism
/ˌtrænsɛnˈdɛntlˌɪzəm, -sən-/ Show Spelled[tran-sen-den-tl-iz-uhm, -
suhn-] Show IPA
–noun
1.
transcendental character, thought, or language.
2.
Also called transcendental philosophy. any philosophy based upon the
doctrine that the principles of reality are to be discovered by the
study of the processes of thought, or a philosophy emphasizing the
intuitive and spiritual above the empirical: in the U.S., associated
with Emerson.
World English Dictionary
transcendentalism (ˌtrænsɛnˈdɛntəˌlɪzəm) [Click for IPA pronunciation
guide]
— n
1. a. any system of philosophy, esp that of Kant, holding that the
key to knowledge of the nature of reality lies in the critical
examination of the processes of reason on which depends the nature of
experience
b. any system of philosophy, esp that of Emerson, that emphasizes
intuition as a means to knowledge or the importance of the search for
the divine
2. vague philosophical speculation
3. the state of being transcendental
4. something, such as thought or language, that is transcendental
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/transcendentalism?r=75&src=ref&ch=dic
- Both excerpts taken from the above link.
The notion is that one 'transcends' themselves into some other state.
I dislike this idea in principle because it has strong connotations of
escapism. That you transcend yourself it to rise above. I don't want
to rise above, I want to embrace myself and in that way simply be what
I am. Transcendence is a confusing term that is vague and doesn't
really mean anything.
However, to embrace yourself as you are. Without any notion of being
better than you are, where you are, and how you are is, imo, to truly
accept your reality and make the most of it.
Many people who are into Buddhism & Daoism seem to want to get rid of
this thing they call an 'ego'. But that to me seems to be a redundant
and nonesensical ideal. You simply can't get rid of something that is
innate to being an individual.
>From what I have gathered from Buddhism is that there is a middle
path. The middle path does not go about by extremism but by
moderation.
- The middle way is to accept that you have an ego, and to condition
yourself into behaviours that are more productive, creative, useful
and skilfull/diligent. Rather than indulge in what ever hedonistic
pleasure you may abide by in any particular moment... to only indulge
in positive behaviours - and thereby forge good habits inplace of bad
ones.
In this way you turn your ego into a tool. You don't take it too
seriously. Not so serious as to believe it is really anything at
all... but nor do you out right deny the fact that it is a real
subjective phenomena, that you take it seriously enough to improve it
(by it, I really mean yourself, your own sense of self - your ego).
There is the comparitive tale of 2 sailors.
- Both are cast adrift at sea. Neither one knows where they are, and
they are at the mercy of the tides, currents, winds and waves.
The first sailor just lets himself be thrown around by the sea.
The second sailor learns how to master his vessel.
The first sailor may eventually, by pure chance come across land...
but he often sees salvation in the distance, only to find the currents
then move him away. He never overcomes the fact that he has no control
over his vessel, and is at the constant mercy of the sea.
The second sailor, having mastered his vessel, may never come across
land... but if he ever sees salvation, he has the control and
fortitude over his vessel to skilfully sail her into shore. The
conditions of the sea have influence upon him, but he uses them to his
advantage. Taming the winds to fill his sail. Using the currents to
his favour. Surfing the waves as he wishes.
The moral to the story is simply that we are blown about by the winds
of ideas, and the tides of emotion on a daily basis. Most people are
just blown around, unable to fully grasp themselves and retain
composure or discipline. Some are strong enough, and know themselves
so well that they can use the ideas that cross their minds to great
effect. They exploit their own emotional energies in ways that are
useful and creative.
As such. The transcedentalist is one who forever tries to jump out of
the boat... it might be fun to float around for a while... free from
the physical constraints of the body/vessel... but it ammounts to
little more than mental masturbation... and it is only in discipline
of the mind and mastery of the body that anybody ever achieves
anything.
I hope that was elaborate enough for you ;]
On Feb 7, 6:46 am, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote:
> Aezen Could you expand on your concept of transcendentalism?
>
> On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 11:51 PM, Æzen <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 31, 4:00 am, Ash <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Hello and greetings Aezen my replies are mixed in the post below.
>
> > > On 1/29/2011 10:47 PM, zen wrote:
>
> > > > This is my first post here, so I thought that this post I shared in
> > > > another group would actually be a good introduction here =]
>
> > > > ***
>
> > > > "There are 2 ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a
> > > > miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle."
> > > > - Einstein
>
> > > > In science, nature - or at least energy - is taken to be something
> > > > inert and void of consciousness. Only from some quirk in the evolution
> > > > of chemistry arising in abiogenises, that engenders evolution of life
> > > > is consciousness derived in ever more intricate and developed ways of
> > > > expression.
>
> > > > However, on the quantum level, it is the interaction of basic energies
> > > > that give rise to the fundamental forces - the laws of natural
> > > > behaviour (also referred to as the fundamental interactions). These
> > > > most basic interactions of energy give rise to all the variety of
> > > > chemical, biological relationships. That again go on to evolve ever
> > > > further, to the point that the interaction of individuals gives rise
> > > > to society, and then nations and global poltics and economics. Yet no
> > > > matter the level of relationship or interaction we want to discuss,
> > > > all relationships are built out of the same fundamental relationships
> > > > between energies.
>
> > > > To suggest that consciousness may exist in energy, yet just like a bit
> > > > in a computer, a lone quanta of energy doesn't do very much. But build
> > > > up the bits and a computer can do amazing things - but all from the
> > > > same fundamentals of a simple 'On& Off'. Similarly, energy could
> > > > simply be consciousness in an undeveloped 'raw' form.
>
> > > > "God sleeps in the rock, dreams in the plant, stirs in the animal, and
> > > > awakens in man."
> > > > - Ibn al 'Arabi
>
> > > > I am not referring to the God of any scripture. But Einsteins
> > > > 'pantheistic' leniency towards seeing nature as divine.
>
> > > > And I agree. I do not believe that a rock is conscious in the same
> > > > sense as we ordinarly define consciousness... but that the very same
> > > > interactions that have coellesced in a particular way to form a rock
> > > > are the same that have have formed different relationships that have
> > > > formed our biology.
>
> > > > I'm basically dancing around the point that we are very much divine
> > > > entities, that our lives are spiritual experiences - however, that
> > > > doesn't entail the need for an individual soul. Merely that there is
> > > > one eternal universal soul that we are apart of.
>
> > > > You can intepret this in a religious context... but I don't see the
> > > > need. If that is as it is, then that is simply it. And as much,
> > > > science is the best tool we have to explore nature. In that sense,
> > > > science, in my opinion, must realise that it IS very much a guide on
> > > > morality& ethics, because it explains to us who we are and why we are
> > > > as best it can.
>
> > > > That rational argument must be the only true way to derive our ethics
> > > > because it opens things up to be tested and see if they hold true.
> > > > What consquences do our actions have? And how can we improve them, and
> > > > improve ourselves?
>
> > > Yes, and the philosophy of science at times will call our attention to
> > > cultural anthropology or other fields as they merit, all within science
> > > IMO. I myself have a very high regard for science as an evolving
> > > paradigm spanning all things, especially the living which devise tools
> > > to interpret environmental information. In my personal belief science is
> > > complementary to nature.
>
> > Very much so. A tool to better understand and even percieve nature.
>
> > > When at peace, when my mood is amenable to it, or otherwise thrust into
> > > consciousness like the most apparent truth I feel very similarly. At
> > > times I hold both perspectives in equanimity, transcendentalist and
> > > naturalist, I have no expression for it..
>
> > The feeling is mutual. However, I dislike the notion of
> > transcendentalism. I prefer to consider it as more a permeation of, or
> > merging with the more sublime essence of nature, rather than rising
> > above it.
>
> > > > I am very much into Buddhist and Daoist philosophies. Though, I
> > > > consider myself a 'Bukist' (my nickname amongst friends is Buk =] )...
> > > > I believe that progress of an individual can only be made when they
> > > > believe that they can live up to the highest moral ideals - even if we
> > > > don't know what they are, to at least believe we can try and discover
> > > > them
>
> > > > I am neither a pessimist nor an optimist, yet a little of both.
> > > > Buddhism has taught me the value of balance between all extremes. The
> > > > middle path. All things in moderation - even moderation in moderation!
>
> > > As a good friend says it, "All things in moderation, especially
> > moderation."
>
> > > > It is healthy to explore the variety of life, yet even better is to
> > > > come to understand the cycles of our own habits as individuals, and
> > > > our general habits as humans. I believe that by being aware of our
> > > > potential to cause harm form our animalistic nature, to our ability to
> > > > be influenced under social pressures allows us to begin to free
> > > > ourselves from them - to understand our nature and help express it in
> > > > productive and creative ways. To choose the things that infuences us.
>
> > > > Before I finish. I will say that I realise Buddhism as a religion is
> > > > full of its own pitfalls of a religion. That it's socio-economic
> > > > tradition is unsustainable and detrimental to a society. Yet, the core
> > > > philosophy - that life is stressful, life is suffering brought about
> > > > by our ignorance and attachments to certain things - is a beautiful,
> > > > apt and in my experience, a true teaching of our human condition.
> > > > Learning to be apart of life, but letting go of wanting more from each
> > > > moment, and simply making the most of what is right in front of you.
> > > > - That doesn't deny responsibility to make plans. It tries to free us
> > > > from the stress of worry to allows us to then do our best in any
> > > > particular moment, from having learned about the cycles, habbits and
> > > > patterns of ourselves and nature - our greater nature.
>
> > > > I will not deny that I wished more people understood Buddhism& Daoism
> > > > in the way I have experienced those philosophies. But that's the crux
> > > > for anyone. That we all think we're right. It's a contradtion to
> > > > believe you're wrong!! Even if you think you are wrong now about
> > > > something, an idea, an action - you are sitll thinking that you are
> > > > right, in that moment, about being wrong, in another moment!
>
> > > A favorite topic of mine is assessments because the dynamics can be very
> > > complex or simple and revealing, and much of it boils down to such
> > > logical statements. One key point is comprehension, if the matter or
> > > variables are beyond comprehension one cannot trust oneself to make the
> > > best judgement, and wouldn't likely be able to identify the best sources
> > > of information. A smarting example is investing faith in certainty, a
> > > thing some make into a 'religion', that leads one into reductio ad
> > > absurdum by ignoring all contradicting alternative views to support a
> > > preconceived notion.
>
> > Nicely put...
>
> > > > Not so bad on it's own, except this seems the
> > > predominant meme pathway, it works because people bow to it
> > > unconsciously giving in to the majority, a vicious cycle often leaning
> > > on a false sense of necessity and urgency.
>
> > Having studied Psychology, there are many complex issues at play
> > (obviously), but none so influental as peoples denial of how easily
> > influenced they are by their peer group to conform. People want to
> > believe they make their own choices, when it has been my experience
> > that this is far from, if only rarely true.
> > - People seek acceptance and validation, and if the dominant culture
> > in society dictates that a particular religion is 'true', then there
> > are immense social pressures on any individual to yield to those
> > pressures and conform.
>
> > Truly, it takes a strong individual to stand up against the majority.
>
> > > Welcome to the group, I am Ash- one who sees boundaries as a challenge,
> > > knows little about much, thinks endlessly, aided by an atrocious memory.
>
> > Thankyou, and I enjoy further discussion =]
>
> > > > Simply put, I understand that I would like to influence people to look
> > > > into these philosophies. I have enjoyed them immensley and feel that
> > > > they have truly taught me alot about how to meditate and observe
> > > > myself, and thereby seeing so much of me in the others I see around
> > > > me.
>
> > > I've had similar experiences with those philosophies, somehow my cursed
> > > memory is a puzzle of continual renewal and rediscovery. This life I
> > > have heard of nothing like it, but it is nice to feel others with me and
> > > very warming to feel others may be like me, it is an unlearning.
>
> > The Daoists speak of 'unlearning' as a virtue. To return ourselves
> > back to the uncarved wooden block. Our primal nature.
>
> > Though I appreciate the sentiment, it to me is not an unlearning, it
> > is relaxing into yourself. You cannot deny your experiences, nor your
> > predisposition to react negatively or positively based on your past
> > experiences/conditionings and your current situation and state of
> > self.
>
> > So it is a continuous learning. An evolution of experience and
> > understanding. Diving into the recesses of self and its hidden
> > stresses and inhibitions to further relax and again create flow where
> > there were
>
> ...
>
> read more »
