Philosophy Is NOT Your Friend

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Impenitent
Posts: 4331
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Philosophy Is NOT Your Friend

Post by Impenitent »

RCSaunders wrote: Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pm
simplicity wrote: Thu Nov 18, 2021 7:28 pm If the purpose of modern life is in achieving some semblance of happiness/contentment, philosophical inquiry is not going to get you there [although it can point in the correct direction]. I don't know about the rest of you, but in my experience, the intellectual folks are almost always over there in the corner hiding from just about everything [that matters].

The intellect is a wonderful tool for practical matters, but as a portal to something beyond getting the toast right, the intellect has little to nothing to offer.
There is nothing wrong with the human intellect. What's wrong is how philosophers have corrupted it.

The following is from the beginning of an article entitled: "Bad Philosophy—There Is No Good Philosophy"
Image

"Philosophy consists very largely of one philosopher arguing that all others are jackasses. He usually proves it, and I should add that he also usually proves that he is one himself." —H. L. Mencken

Bad Philosophers

With rare exception, the entire corpus of recorded philosophy is utterly useless. The only exceptions are Aristotle, Peter Abelard (with reservation) and John Locke (with reservation). All the rest are not only wrong but so distort truth that to be influenced by any of them is tantamount to self-induced insanity.

All philosophers are bad, but the worst are Plato, Rene Descartes, Spinoza, George Berkeley, David Hume, Immanuel Kant, Edmund Burke, Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Hegel, Arthur Schopenhauer. Auguste Comte, Søren Kierkegaard, William James, Friedrich Nietzsche, John Dewey, Bertrand Russell, Martin Heidegger, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Karl Popper, Willard Quine, A.J. Ayer, John Austin, Thomas Kuhn, Paul Feyerabend, Avram Noam Chomsky, Ronald Myles Dworkin, and Roger Penrose.

These are the worst because they have, historically, most influenced what is called philosophy today and are held as authorities in philosophical matters. The philosophy of today, which they spawned and made possible, is a total disaster.

The worst of all philosophy today is what is being promoted in every academic institution, including every logical positivist: including Moritz Schlick, Rudolf Carnap, Herbert Feigl, and Friedrich Waismann; every cultural Marxist: (critical theory, Frankfurt School), including Max Horkheimer, Theodor W. Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, Friedrich Pollock, Erich Fromm, Walter Benjamin. Ernst Bloch, and Jürgen Habermas; and every post modernist: including: Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, Jean-François Lyotard, Richard Rorty, Jean Baudrillard, Fredric Jameson, and Douglas Kellner.

Finally there are the millions of little philosopherets—every professor, psychologist, economist, social/political ideologist, pseudo-scientist, and religious teacher who dabbles in, "philosophy."

Bad Philosophy

Philosophy was originally defined as, "love of wisdom," meaning that kind of knowledge required for living successfully as a human being. It originally included all knowledge, like the physical sciences. As the successful branches of intellectual inquiry (like the sciences) were established, philosophy was refined to mean those aspects of knowledge that were fundamental to all other knowledge. While the sciences were discovering the nature of the physical universe, philosophers were attempting to identify the nature of existence itself and what reality is (metaphysics); what the nature of material existence, the physical, living, conscious, and mental are (ontology); what the nature of knowledge itself is (epistemology); what principles determined how individuals must guide their lives to live successfully (ethics); how human beings must relate to each other (politics); and the ultimate nature of purpose, value, and happiness (aesthetics).

While the sciences have been phenomenally successful, philosophy is a complete failure. Instead of discovering and explaining the ultimate nature of existence and reality, philosophy denies the existence the sciences study is real and describes reality as an illusion. Instead of discovering and describing the nature of reality that makes it knowable, philosophy denies that reality can ever be truly known. Instead of discovering and describing the nature of knowledge, philosophy denies that any certain knowledge is possible. Instead of discovering and describing the principles by which individuals can guide their lives successfully, philosophy denies there are such principles or reduces them to some kind of mystic mandates or mere custom. Instead of discovering and describing how individual human beings must relate to one another, philosophy regards individuals as having no value or meaning except as members of some social collectives, from tribes, to states, to mankind. Instead of discovering and describing a life that is worth living and how to achieve it, philosophy denies that true success and happiness are possible and reduces human life to a constant battle against evil.

.....
You are right. That kind of philosophy, which happens to be what is taught and promoted in every academic institution in the world, is not your friend. It is the enemy of all reason, knowledge, virtue and human success.
nice article- sophistry from everyone ... skeptical existentialism for the rest ...

-Imp
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Philosophy Is NOT Your Friend

Post by simplicity »

RCSaunders wrote: Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:24 pmYou are right. That kind of philosophy, which happens to be what is taught and promoted in every academic institution in the world, is not your friend. It is the enemy of all reason, knowledge, virtue and human success.
I don't really see it that way. Philosophy is taking things that are thought to be known and trying to figure out a grand scheme for how they might all fit together. It's like being in love with somebody and working backwards in order to understand how this person happens to be perfection in human form.

Folks need to confront the notion that the intellect can only get us so far [and not too far, at that]. Once they have digested this morsel, they can perhaps take what our intelligence can give us and leave the rest.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Philosophy Is NOT Your Friend

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

simplicity wrote: Tue Nov 23, 2021 7:43 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Tue Nov 23, 2021 4:20 am
It is obvious common sense that one can never grasp a deep understanding of the subject-matter from merely reading a paragraph or two on the internet.
But that is possible if one already have a deep understanding of the subject-matter via having grasped the subject from prior readings and extensive research into the subject matter.

If you are referring to my above post, I have done very extensive research and reading on Buddhism and the full range of the subject matter [including Zen].
You could read or study about Zen 24/7 for 10,000 lifetimes and still have no realization of what it is in the least. This is the only real teaching in Zen, you must do the work [meditation] to gain the insight.

The dispute between the Northern and Southern schools have no bearing on anything of importance [intellectually]. Do you know the story of Hui Neng, the Sixth Patriarch of Zen?
I am very familiar with Hui Neng. I have read Hui Neng Platform Sutra MANY times [sometime ago] in my discussion/debate of it in other forums.

I just mentioned the 'Two Monks Disputing the Flag moving' story in another post.

What is critical with that insight or 'realization' is that the brain must be in a certain algorithm [neural state of connectivity] to manifest that 'realization'.

One of the most optimal and effective strategy to achieve such a state of realization is via meditation [there are two main types].

Hindu philosophies recognize humans are multivariate, so they have established different types of meditations and strategies to cater for people with different proclivity towards spirituality, e.g. via pure devotion, actions, or knowledge/wisdom.

In contrast to your limited view, so it possible to achieve that realization via a focus on knowledge [intellectual and reflection] as a meditative technique [ongoing for >5000 years re Hinduism Vedas], albeit not alone but combined with some degree of 'spiritual' drives.

Btw, Zen also engages the intellect actively to its final surrender. Zen monks have to spend a long time on Koans engaging their intellectual faculty till its ultimate failure.
Have you read this?
Zen and the Brain: Toward an Understanding of Meditation and Consciousness
https://www.amazon.com/Zen-Brain-Unders ... 0262511096

Whilst mediation is most effective and optimal to achieve that 'realization' which is merely a specific state of neural algorithm connectivity, that algorithm can also emerged from various means or events, e.g. drugs, hallucinogens, mental illness, brain damage, magnetic trigger, electricity trigger, stress, out of the blue, exercises, the arts, etc.
I wonder you are aware of this.

Are you familiar with Jill Bolte [pls confirm?], a neuroscientist [anatomist] who suffered a very severe stroke and severe brain damage, while at the same time experienced some kind of 'realization' that a monk [zen or otherwise] would take years [20, 30 or more] to achieve.
https://www.ted.com/talks/jill_bolte_ta ... anguage=en

Note poster in here like "Dontaskme" who keep harping on 'non-duality' without any solid basis of knowledge for it. Non-duality is a manifestation of meditation-proper but in Dontaskme case, it is more like a sudden realization due to some mental illness.

Also are you familiar with DMT, the Spiritual Molecule?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwZqVqbkyLM&t=22s

There are those who have had sudden 'realization' out of the blue, perhaps this was what happened to Hui Neng, St. Paul, and the likes.

Note this guy have had significant spiritual experience, but was cured of it when his father took him to see a psychiatrist and neuroscientist to confirm he had temporal epilepsy, i.e. due to mental illness.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIiIsDIkDtg&t=1s

I have done extensive research in the various ways that different people have had that 'realization' but they don't have any idea how it happen to them. There are many many ways and I have only mention some.

I believed all their 'spiritual' experiences are represented by a core neural algorithm that trigger their 'spiritual' experience but in different conditions and circumstances, and with extended connection to different part of the brain.
It is can be redirected to evil acts such as Muhammad with Islam. Note this 7 parts re The Epileptic Prophet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlO4nZUGVf4

You may personally have the inclination for the non-knowledge [intellectual] path, but I believe the knowledge path with proper meditation to that 'realization' is the MOST effective and optimal since such knowledge will ensure one is not ignorant of what is going on and will not get lost if there are unconscious deviations.

What is critical in the path of knowledge is one must not cling to the knowledge itself.
Note the Buddha's 'Raft Metaphor' in taking knowledge as a mean and not an end.
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Philosophy Is NOT Your Friend

Post by simplicity »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 5:29 amIn contrast to your limited view, so it possible to achieve that realization via a focus on knowledge [intellectual and reflection] as a meditative technique [ongoing for >5000 years re Hinduism Vedas], albeit not alone but combined with some degree of 'spiritual' drives.

Btw, Zen also engages the intellect actively to its final surrender. Zen monks have to spend a long time on Koans engaging their intellectual faculty till its ultimate failure.
Perhaps this story might resonate with you...

Many years ago I decided to dedicate myself to full-time Zen practice and took a couple of years off this this end. I became a resident student at a Zen Center with a Zen master who received transmission from Suzuki roshi [who helped to bring Zen to the West in starting the SF Zen Center in late fifties]. After many months of intensive meditation practice and during our most intensive meditation periods held twice a year [Ango, a month-long period of seventeen daily 30-45 minute meditation periods beginning at 4:45a, I was called into dokusan [j., for interview where roshi would judge your "progress"]. After a formal mini-ceremony, the student ended up in a kneeling meditation posture about 18 inches in from of roshi [with his laser beam eyes hyper-focused on your own]. This is where I found myself this day.

The first part of dokusan is where the Zen master would tell you anything he believed would help your practice. After this instruction, he welcomed questions. Since there is only one lesson in Zen [meditation], I never asked any question until this particular dokusan. Allow me to digress.

Each Thursday night, roshi would have a book reading where he would read from one of his writings or the writing of Dogen or some other profound master from the past. After the reading was over, again, he would field questions from the group assembled [the resident students and members from the sangha...about 30 altogether]. Many of these members had been Zen students for literally decades and yet they would ask the same questions week after week, this is, why is this, how can this be that way, so on and so forth. It drove me nuts.

Back to dokusan. One rule in the Zen center was that you were to NEVER concern yourself with anybody else's practice...ever. Only concentrate on your own practice. But I just had to ask roshi the following..."How was it after decades of being a Zen student can these people ask the same questions over and over again when there are no answers to any of them? Meditation [in essence] is the answer to EVERY question."

Roshi gets this intense look on his face as if felt as if his stare was going right through my head. [As an aside, and as you might be aware, it is tradition in formal Zen practice if you have lost your concentration [meditative state], the teacher would literally smack you back into it!!]

One minute went by, two minutes went by, three minutes went by, and I thought I was going to get hammered when after about five minutes passed, roshi gets a big smile on his face and says, "You think it drives you crazy, I've been listening to these people for over thirty years!" We both started laughing, I bowed and went back to my meditation.

I get all the things you are saying but none of it really matters. Buddha taught meditation as the way for good reason. I am not going to dispute the intellectual part of it because until you have some realization, you will not understand its part in the whole.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Philosophy Is NOT Your Friend

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

simplicity wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 10:27 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 5:29 amIn contrast to your limited view, so it possible to achieve that realization via a focus on knowledge [intellectual and reflection] as a meditative technique [ongoing for >5000 years re Hinduism Vedas], albeit not alone but combined with some degree of 'spiritual' drives.

Btw, Zen also engages the intellect actively to its final surrender. Zen monks have to spend a long time on Koans engaging their intellectual faculty till its ultimate failure.
Perhaps this story might resonate with you...

Many years ago I decided to dedicate myself to full-time Zen practice and took a couple of years off this this end. I became a resident student at a Zen Center with a Zen master who received transmission from Suzuki roshi [who helped to bring Zen to the West in starting the SF Zen Center in late fifties]. After many months of intensive meditation practice and during our most intensive meditation periods held twice a year [Ango, a month-long period of seventeen daily 30-45 minute meditation periods beginning at 4:45a, I was called into dokusan [j., for interview where roshi would judge your "progress"]. After a formal mini-ceremony, the student ended up in a kneeling meditation posture about 18 inches in from of roshi [with his laser beam eyes hyper-focused on your own]. This is where I found myself this day.

The first part of dokusan is where the Zen master would tell you anything he believed would help your practice. After this instruction, he welcomed questions. Since there is only one lesson in Zen [meditation], I never asked any question until this particular dokusan. Allow me to digress.

Each Thursday night, roshi would have a book reading where he would read from one of his writings or the writing of Dogen or some other profound master from the past. After the reading was over, again, he would field questions from the group assembled [the resident students and members from the sangha...about 30 altogether]. Many of these members had been Zen students for literally decades and yet they would ask the same questions week after week, this is, why is this, how can this be that way, so on and so forth. It drove me nuts.

Back to dokusan. One rule in the Zen center was that you were to NEVER concern yourself with anybody else's practice...ever. Only concentrate on your own practice. But I just had to ask roshi the following..."How was it after decades of being a Zen student can these people ask the same questions over and over again when there are no answers to any of them? Meditation [in essence] is the answer to EVERY question."

Roshi gets this intense look on his face as if felt as if his stare was going right through my head. [As an aside, and as you might be aware, it is tradition in formal Zen practice if you have lost your concentration [meditative state], the teacher would literally smack you back into it!!]

One minute went by, two minutes went by, three minutes went by, and I thought I was going to get hammered when after about five minutes passed, roshi gets a big smile on his face and says, "You think it drives you crazy, I've been listening to these people for over thirty years!" We both started laughing, I bowed and went back to my meditation.

I get all the things you are saying but none of it really matters. Buddha taught meditation as the way for good reason. I am not going to dispute the intellectual part of it because until you have some realization, you will not understand its part in the whole.
I am not into Zen, but after extensive research and readings into Buddhism I am familiar with D. T. Suzuki and with your sort of experiences and thoughts [it is a good read] as expressed similarly by many Zen students.

Whilst Suzuki practiced Zen [..I believe others as well], I understand his path [in his mid-life] is that of the intellectual way [his natural proclivity to it] as I had mentioned and you seem to be put off by it. For his later years, see below.

Note:
Besides teaching about Zen practice and the history of Zen (Chan) Buddhism, Suzuki was an expert scholar on the related philosophy called, in Japanese, Kegon, which he thought of as the intellectual explication of Zen experience.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._T._Suz ... ilosophies
Suzuki also wrote many books.
Since the founder [Suzuki] of your particular Zen school is an intellectual, you should not be too apprehensive and unaccommodating of the intellectual approach to spirituality which I was mentioning.

Btw, I had also emphasized what counts is one must achieved 'that specific neural algorithm state' that enable "that" spiritual realization.
That neural state can be cultivated and triggered in many ways, i.e. meditation [spiritual] or others [natural and artificial] as I had mentioned above.

Dr. Andrew Newberg a neuroscientists is researching into understanding this spiritual neural state;
  • Dr. Andrew Newberg is a neuroscientist who studies the relationship between brain function and various mental states. He is a pioneer in the neurological study of religious and spiritual experiences, a field known as “neurotheology.”
    His research includes taking brain scans of people in prayer, meditation, rituals, and trance states, in an attempt to better understand the nature of religious and spiritual practices and attitudes.
    http://www.andrewnewberg.com/
At present, the above sort of research are using very crude tools to study the very refine and complex brain.
I believer when we have more advanced knowledge and technology, we will understand the core of that 'realization' in those advance meditators are the same as the "pseudo-spiritual" realization of the drug addicts, the hallucinogenics, the brain damage, the out-of-the-blue etc.

But I believe the most effective and optimal path is the intellectual/wisdom spiritual path which provide grounding and a sound foundation to that "realization".
I get all the things you are saying but none of it really matters. Buddha taught meditation as the way for good reason. I am not going to dispute the intellectual part of it because until you have some realization, you will not understand its part in the whole.
Note there are many who have had a sudden "realization" of spirituality from natural [meditation, brain damage, etc.] or artificial means [drugs, hallucinogens, etc.].
This is like striking a big lottery [spiritual sense], without the intellectual grounding; some have benefitted positively from it in their lifetime, but many has a miserable and tortured life or turned evil thereafter, especially those who experienced such sudden 'realization' from drugs, and the likes.

Analogically to,
“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”
we have
“Science without spiritual realization is lame, spiritual realization without science is blind.”

'Science' in this case in the intellectual/wisdom groundings I mentioned above.

Note:
  • Later in life Suzuki was more inclined to Jodo Shin (True Pure Land) practice on a personal level, seeing in the doctrine of Tariki, or other power as opposed to self power, an abandonment of self that is entirely complementary to Zen practice and yet to his mind even less willful than traditional Zen. In his book Buddha of Infinite Light (2002), (originally titled, Shin Buddhism) Suzuki declared that, "Of all the developments that Mahayana Buddhism has achieved in East Asia, the most remarkable one is the Shin teaching of Pure Land Buddhism." (p. 22)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._T._Suzuki#Zen_training
As Suzuki moved on to Jodo Shin, I don't think you follow suit?
Jōdo Shinshū
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C5%8Ddo_Shinsh%C5%AB

Note this syndrome which I believe infected Suzuki in his later life;
  • Across the world, people have varying levels of belief (and disbelief) in God, with some nations being more devout than others. But new research reveals one constant across parts of the globe: As people age, their belief in God seems to increase.
    https://www.livescience.com/19971-belie ... m-age.html
While Jodo Shin does not speak of God per se, the reference to Amitābha and Pure Land is in a similar genre.
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Philosophy Is NOT Your Friend

Post by simplicity »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 6:08 amAs Suzuki moved on to Jodo Shin, I don't think you follow suit?
Jōdo Shinshū
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C5%8Ddo_Shinsh%C5%AB

Note this syndrome which I believe infected Suzuki in his later life;
  • Across the world, people have varying levels of belief (and disbelief) in God, with some nations being more devout than others. But new research reveals one constant across parts of the globe: As people age, their belief in God seems to increase.
    https://www.livescience.com/19971-belie ... m-age.html
While Jodo Shin does not speak of God per se, the reference to Amitābha and Pure Land is in a similar genre.
We speak of different Suzuki's. I was referring to Shunryu Suzuki. You may be familiar with him as well, as he not only started the SF Zen Center, but also wrote an incredible book, "Zen Mind Beginners Mind," which was an instant classic as well as an incredible work of teaching skill.

I am also familiar with DT Suzuki as it was his, "Essentials of Zen Buddhism," that lit a fire under me when I was first formally introduced to Zen.

I am not teacher. I have told you what my appreciation of the role of intellectualism in Zen is. I consider myself a purist [as many Zen students do] and therefore try to distance myself from the intellectual part. Once you "get it" [that it is meditation only], what more must one understand? You do the work, you receive whatever benefits that might accrue. If you seek your path with benefiting in mind, you will receive nothing.

Zen, infinitely simply...infinitely complex. Leave the complex [intellectualism] alone and just be.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Philosophy Is NOT Your Friend

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

simplicity wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 9:12 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 6:08 amAs Suzuki moved on to Jodo Shin, I don't think you follow suit?
Jōdo Shinshū
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C5%8Ddo_Shinsh%C5%AB

Note this syndrome which I believe infected Suzuki in his later life;
  • Across the world, people have varying levels of belief (and disbelief) in God, with some nations being more devout than others. But new research reveals one constant across parts of the globe: As people age, their belief in God seems to increase.
    https://www.livescience.com/19971-belie ... m-age.html
While Jodo Shin does not speak of God per se, the reference to Amitābha and Pure Land is in a similar genre.
We speak of different Suzuki's. I was referring to Shunryu Suzuki. You may be familiar with him as well, as he not only started the SF Zen Center, but also wrote an incredible book, "Zen Mind Beginners Mind," which was an instant classic as well as an incredible work of teaching skill.

I am also familiar with DT Suzuki as it was his, "Essentials of Zen Buddhism," that lit a fire under me when I was first formally introduced to Zen.

I am not teacher. I have told you what my appreciation of the role of intellectualism in Zen is. I consider myself a purist [as many Zen students do] and therefore try to distance myself from the intellectual part. Once you "get it" [that it is meditation only], what more must one understand? You do the work, you receive whatever benefits that might accrue. If you seek your path with benefiting in mind, you will receive nothing.

Zen, infinitely simply...infinitely complex. Leave the complex [intellectualism] alone and just be.
I am familiar with Soto Zen as one branch of Japanese Zen.
I have read about Shunryu Suzuki but did not dig deep into his activities.
I have heard a lot from various Zen students of the SF Zen Center re their practices and experiences.

As I had stated, humans are multivariate and thus have different proclivity for different paths to spirituality.
If you prefer the non-intellectual path I can understand your natural inclinations for it.

My natural proclivity is for the intellectual path but of course combined with the imperative meditation, mindfulness, etc.

Personally I believe the intellectual path provide the grounding to ensure one "get it" right amidst all possible impulses [from within and externally] to knock one off to the inefficient or wrong ways.
It is like one having a compass in travelling to a destination via unknown territory, as one is guided to one target even if one has to divert from one course temporary due to obstacles and other hindrances.

Perhaps you are lucky to "get it."

In many cases, those practicing spirituality claimed they 'get it' but without any intellectual grounding, their 'get it' is only their personal subjective feelings or confirm by the subjective view of their supervisor.
Take the case of Osho, Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh, where he had thousand of disciples who claim to "get it" [evident by their own experiences] presumably acknowledge by their guru. Despite Rajneesh has some degree of spirituality and its knowledge, ultimately his whole business was a scam.
There had been many other so-called Godman where their disciples claimed to "get it" but ultimately it was a scam.

The Abrahamic religionists also claim they 'get it' and there is nothing to learn except whatever is given by God in their holy texts.

Also there are some who took drugs, hallucinogen, had brain damage, suffer from mental illness, out of the blue, etc. who have some sort of sudden realization and claimed they 'get it'.

Whatever the path, people will flow with their natural spiritual inclinations, but rationally I believe the intellectual/knowledge path is the most effective and optimal.

However I am optimistic, in the future regardless of which path one is inclined to, one can confirm whether one is on the right path via brain imaging of the specific neural activities [algorithm] that support positive spirituality.
Note
The Human Connectome Project
http://www.humanconnectomeproject.org/
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Philosophy Is NOT Your Friend

Post by simplicity »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Fri Nov 26, 2021 4:30 am Perhaps you are lucky to "get it."
What there is "to get" is the relationship between the relative and the Absolute. This understanding comes first, intellectually, then non-intellectually [realization].

I believe you understand the intellectual discussion of relative/Absolute so there isn't reason to go through that, but THE major point of contention in chatting about such is when folks gets confused as the discussion goes back and forth between the two. Most people believe that Zen is pretty crazy because it makes little sense to them [and this is why].

"Getting it" [intellectually] means that you must believe the Heart Sutra is true. Very, very few people will ever go there because it means taking on a very different approach to all things in one's life...like the idea that all things are One. Most people believe this is a metaphor, but It's not. It is literal...but something you cannot begin to get your head around unless you accept the relative nature of all things knowable.

All intellectual traditions have their doctrine and followers must get that as well, but when it comes down to it, and although there are many, many paths, it is likely that they all have a similar terminus.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Philosophy Is NOT Your Friend

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

simplicity wrote: Fri Nov 26, 2021 11:01 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Fri Nov 26, 2021 4:30 am Perhaps you are lucky to "get it."
What there is "to get" is the relationship between the relative and the Absolute. This understanding comes first, intellectually, then non-intellectually [realization].
One point is the relation between the Relative and Absolute is very plain.
There are the finer points of,
  • 1. relative-relative vs absolute-absolute
    2. relative-absolute [p] vs absolutely-absolute [not-p].
The above is represented by the Doctrine of Two Truths, i.e. the Dilemma of p and not-p.
I believe you understand the intellectual discussion of relative/Absolute so there isn't reason to go through that, but THE major point of contention in chatting about such is when folks gets confused as the discussion goes back and forth between the two. Most people believe that Zen is pretty crazy because it makes little sense to them [and this is why].

"Getting it" [intellectually] means that you must believe the Heart Sutra is true. Very, very few people will ever go there because it means taking on a very different approach to all things in one's life...like the idea that all things are One. Most people believe this is a metaphor, but It's not. It is literal...but something you cannot begin to get your head around unless you accept the relative nature of all things knowable.
I have read and listened to the Heart Sutra countless times. I have covered all the main sutras from the main schools of Buddhism. [sometime ago, so not on my finger tips at present].

If we look at it from the Doctrine of Two Truth, it is apparently literal but the details are VERY complex.

However the Heart Sutra has a finer interpretation in terms of the Doctrine of the Four Truths,

There is still a finer aspects of the Two Truths into the Four Truths, i.e. the Tetralemma, i.e.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetralemma
  • 1. p
    2. not-p
    3. both p and not-p
    4. neither p nor not-p
As per 4, whatever is deemed to be 'enlightenment' [nirvana] mentioned in the Heart Sutra is ultimately empty as well [emptiness is empty in itself] as such should never be clung to or attached to.

The point here whatever is believed [re the Heart Sutra] will ultimate effect the necessary mental algorithm that support that ultimate state at its most refine level. [note at the most refined level and not the other levels].

This is where we have the contentious issues between those of the yogacara schools versus Madhyamaka schools.
The yogacara are ultimately realists at its most refined level. The yogacara believed there is 'something' ultimate i.e. the Absolute. If you believe the Absolute as ultimate then you have landed yourself in the yogacara beliefs.

Meanwhile the Madhyamaka [reason-based] are anti-realists who believe even the Absolute itself or the Absolutely-absolute is empty.

Since you are not into the depths of knowledge, not sure if you are aware of the above two ultimate dichotomies of Buddhism, do you?
This is why I believe the knowledge/wisdom path is most effective where I can differentiate between realism and anti-realism which can have an impact on one mental development and disposition at the finer levels.
All intellectual traditions have their doctrine and followers must get that as well, but when it comes down to it, and although there are many, many paths, it is likely that they all have a similar terminus.
The term "Intellectual" can misleading in relation to Buddhism, i.e. it is more like intellectual in the sense of the academics and theorists, i.e. those who don't give a damn about the practical.
Instead of 'intellectual' I would prefer "knowledge/wisdom-based" which entail elements of the practical and personal practice.

As mentioned above there are two ultimate terminus with Buddhism as in philosophy, note
All Philosophies Reduced to Realism vs Idealism
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=28643

Philosophical Realism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_realism

Since Buddhism is also philosophical with practice, it is also reduced to
Realism versus Anti-Realism at the very finer level.

From my research, realists are somehow [very subtly] infected with elements of attachments and clingingness triggered by some existential crisis. Realists from those of Buddhism are also influenced by such attachments but at a very subliminal level which is difficult to detect.
If you are interested I can point some direction and references for you to explore. However there is a lot of reading involved which may not suit you since you are adverse to the path of knowledge.

As Kant highlighted this very subtle influence,
Even the wisest of men cannot free himself from them {the illusions}.
After long effort he perhaps succeeds in guarding himself against actual error; but he will never be able to free himself from the Illusion, which unceasingly mocks and torments him. B397
Some may think they have free themselves from the illusion and attachments but at the finest levels they are still caught with it.

That is why I stated there is more to 'get it' than just 'get it'.
Age
Posts: 20198
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy Is NOT Your Friend

Post by Age »

simplicity wrote: Thu Nov 18, 2021 7:28 pm If the purpose of modern life is in achieving some semblance of happiness/contentment, philosophical inquiry is not going to get you there [although it can point in the correct direction].
When you say, "modern life", what are you referring to, EXACTLY?

Is it only in "modern life" the purpose of 'you', human beings, could be achieving happiness/contentment?

Also, I do NOT think, in ANY life, the purpose of ANY one would be in achieving some 'semblance', because this would CONTRADICT the very purpose of being one's True Self, which would be a FAR MORE purpose than just PRETENDING to be some thing one is NOT.

Anyway, philosophical inquiry may NOT get you anywhere, including to be living a Truly happy and contented life. However, through philosophical inquiry one can learn WHY they are NOT Truly happy and content in Life, which then leads them to discovering HOW they can make a Truly happy and contented life, for "themselves" and "others".

Anyhow, the purpose of "modern life" would have to be what you wrote above, which appears could NEVER be the purpose of ANY life anyway.
simplicity wrote: Thu Nov 18, 2021 7:28 pm I don't know about the rest of you, but in my experience, the intellectual folks are almost always over there in the corner hiding from just about everything [that matters].

The intellect is a wonderful tool for practical matters, but as a portal to something beyond getting the toast right, the intellect has little to nothing to offer.
Age
Posts: 20198
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy Is NOT Your Friend

Post by Age »

simplicity wrote: Fri Nov 19, 2021 8:18 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:12 am It is stated there are as many definitions of 'what is philosophy' as the number of people who attempt to define it.
I suggest your read up at least 200 different sorts [categories] of definition of 'what is philosophy' as abstract the core essence from the whole range of definitions. Then you will get to the definition that is similar to mine.
I truly understand that you can slice and dice anything anybody says [and you can also win any argument if you understand how thinking works], but this is just a friendly forum where people get together to chat about whatever occurs to them.

It is also my appreciation that we humans mis-use our intellect to a degree where it completely fucks-up most people's lives.
This would be one of the truest lines of thought spoken and expressed in this forum
simplicity wrote: Fri Nov 19, 2021 8:18 pm So I advocate for people to consider becoming much less dependent on it [and concentrate on accepting what we can know as reality].
I agree with this also.
simplicity wrote: Fri Nov 19, 2021 8:18 pm In this way, at least people have a fighting chance to experience some sort of contentment in their lives [it doesn't take a genius to ascertain that mankind is spinning out of control, as even the great majority of so-called successful people are a complete mess,the rest appearing to be on life-support].
When I use the words 'intelligence' and 'intellect' I refer to them as:

'Intelligence' is just the ability to learn, understand, and reason.

And,

'Intellect' is just 'that' what has already been learned, understood, and reasoned.

EVERY human being is born with True and FULL 'intelligence', and in fact the younger one is the more 'intelligent' they usually REALLY are, with the opposite also being true, that is; the older one becomes the more 'less intelligent' they CAN, and usually do, become.

Obviously, the older one becomes the more 'intellectual' they become, but this can be the biggest downfall for 'them' and for 'humanity', itself, also.

However, even though the more 'intellectual' one becomes and they can become less 'intelligent', 'intelligence', itself, is NEVER gone. 'Intelligence' ALWAYS REMAIN. 'Intelligence', however, just gets lost, or buried so deep under 'intellect' that 'intelligence' becomes harder to uncover and find, to just bring it back to the surface again. Where it REALLY belongs.

The rest of what can be expressed and explained here will PROVE just how True these statements REALLY ARE.
Age
Posts: 20198
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy Is NOT Your Friend

Post by Age »

Terrapin Station wrote: Fri Nov 19, 2021 9:06 pm "If the purpose of modern life is in achieving some semblance of happiness/contentment, philosophical inquiry is not going to get you there "

What if philosophical inquiry in itself is one of the things that makes you happy and content?
But could just 'inquiry', itself, make one Truly happy and/or content, if they are NOT finding answers? After all what would be the purpose of 'inquiry' if one is NOT finding answers nor solutions?

Could one of the main reasons WHY 'you', human beings, are REALLY NOT that happy nor content, in the 'life' or days when this is being written, be because 'you' are NOT finding thee answers, which 'you' KNOW are t/here?
Age
Posts: 20198
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy Is NOT Your Friend

Post by Age »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 6:57 am
simplicity wrote: Fri Nov 19, 2021 8:18 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:12 am It is stated there are as many definitions of 'what is philosophy' as the number of people who attempt to define it.
I suggest your read up at least 200 different sorts [categories] of definition of 'what is philosophy' as abstract the core essence from the whole range of definitions. Then you will get to the definition that is similar to mine.
I truly understand that you can slice and dice anything anybody says [and you can also win any argument if you understand how thinking works], but this is just a friendly forum where people get together to chat about whatever occurs to them.

It is also my appreciation that we humans mis-use our intellect to a degree where it completely fucks-up most people's lives. So I advocate for people to consider becoming much less dependent on it [and concentrate on accepting what we can know as reality]. In this way, at least people have a fighting chance to experience some sort of contentment in their lives [it doesn't take a genius to ascertain that mankind is spinning out of control, as even the great majority of so-called successful people are a complete mess,the rest appearing to be on life-support].
The problem why mankind is spinning out of control to SOME degrees is due to a lack of a "compass" to guide them toward the optimality of their well being so thus contribute to the overall well being of humanity.

To do so, it is essential we dig, slice and dice into the origins of our thoughts so we can reach the proximate root causes and therefrom establish the effective compass to enable improvements.
This is VERY True. However, because 'you', adult human beings, are NOT being Truly Honest about the Wrong you ALL do, and so also do NOT seriously want and seek to change, for the better, the ACTUAL root cause of WHY 'you' ALL do Wrong has NOT YET been UNCOVERED, well by most of you anyway.
simplicity wrote: Fri Nov 19, 2021 8:18 pm That is the only way humanity had been able to produce results for the rest of humanity albeit at the present; it is not up to expectations but nevertheless there is a trend of improvements since 200,000 years ago and we must continue on this path in the future.
LOL I would MUCH PREFER to live 200,000 years before the days when this was being written. I KNOW I would be MUCH MORE happy AND content in those days.
simplicity wrote: Fri Nov 19, 2021 8:18 pm I don't expect the 95% of population to follow up on serious digging, slicing and dicing, but I believe such THIS forum is the place for those who are serious to discuss such a methodology.
Well considering 'you', "veritas aequitas", have OBVIOUSLY NOT done that much digging AT ALL, there is REALLY NOT much that you have UNCOVERED to even LOOK AT and "slice and dice", as some say.
simplicity wrote: Fri Nov 19, 2021 8:18 pm Btw, this is not a merely 'friendly' forum for small talks but a place for serious philosophical discussions [evident from the main theme of this forum, i.e. the Philosophy Now Magazine], which unfortunately not many are doing so.
What is 'philosophy', to you, "veritas aequitas"?

But, by current trend, you will NOT answer this question, and this is because you do the very OPPOSITE of what 'philosophy' once meant. That is; you will only LOOK AT and DISCUSS things with those you have CHOSEN to be WORTHY of DISCUSSING with. Which would, OBVIOUSLY, only give you are VERY NARROWED and SMALL field of view of things. As evidenced AND PROVED here by your writings.
Age
Posts: 20198
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy Is NOT Your Friend

Post by Age »

simplicity wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 9:43 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Fri Nov 19, 2021 9:06 pm "If the purpose of modern life is in achieving some semblance of happiness/contentment, philosophical inquiry is not going to get you there "

What if philosophical inquiry in itself is one of the things that makes you happy and content?
I would suspect that such an individual has many other things going on in their lives which provide that comfort. Again, in my experience and the limited exposure I have had to "professional" philosophers, most of these folks [including myself] were brought to such an inquiry through very difficult life experiences.
This is a very great point, and one I had not even considered before. This also would help in explaining WHY only relatively very few reach glimpses of thee ACTUAL Truths in Life.
simplicity wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 9:43 pm Is your experience at odds with my own?
Age
Posts: 20198
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy Is NOT Your Friend

Post by Age »

simplicity wrote: Mon Nov 22, 2021 7:00 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 4:13 am Even in Zen [your path] there are two main types to cater for different people with different inclinations.
Northern school of Zen [北宗禅] ( Hokushū Zen): One of the two schools formed by the first schism in the Zen (Ch’an) school in China. The other school is called the Southern school of Zen. The fifth Chinese Zen patriarch Hung-jen had two capable disciples.

One was Shen-hsiu (606–706), who propagated Zen in northern China and upheld the traditional doctrine of gradual enlightenment. His school became the Northern school of Zen.

The other disciple was Hui-neng (638–713), who became the sixth patriarch and spread Zen in southern China. He formulated and taught the doctrine of sudden enlightenment (also known as abrupt, or immediate, enlightenment), and his school came to be called the Southern school of Zen.
The Northern school rapidly declined, while Hui-neng produced many able disciples and his Southern school became the mainstream of Chinese Zen. The Japanese Zen schools derive from the Southern school.
https://www.nichirenlibrary.org/en/dic/Content/N/96
Wouldn't it be wonderful if you could just read a paragraph or two on the internet and have a deep understanding of the subject-matter?
It is. But that feeling is dissipated by not being able to share that understanding, FULLY, with "others" YET.
Post Reply