Philosophy Now Forum

Here is my summary of the Alan Watts contextual seminar of Do You Do It Or Does It Do You: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbcanJOd3sU
I had a lot of trouble breaking such a powerful speech down into a short video, even though it can also be broken down into a single sentence.

Essentially my take on the program is that there is no beginning and no end to anything. We are all an integral part of the universe and in order to be successful in this life all we have to do is whatever we have been doing already.

What are your takes on this lecture? I'll post the full program here below if you want to enjoy it for yourself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FgVGt96KsM

.





LOVE Alan Watts. Sure many others here do as well.

Embed your links & make them accessible but not the focus of your thread.


State clearly what you got out of viewing the links & involve the viewer more or you will have over 150 hits without a response...







..........................................................






.

To be is to do. Sartre.
To do is to be. Descartes.
To be do be do. Sinatra.

TSBU wrote:To be is to do. Sartre.
To do is to be. Descartes.
To be do be do. Sinatra.

I heard a joke on the radio yesterday:

Q. What's the difference between Dubai and Abu Dhabi?

A. The people in Dubai don't like The Flintstones but the people in Abu Dhabi do.

I don't usually tell jokes but your post reminded me of it.

Harbal wrote:

TSBU wrote:To be is to do. Sartre.
To do is to be. Descartes.
To be do be do. Sinatra.

I heard a joke on the radio yesterday:

Q. What's the difference between Dubai and Abu Dhabi?

A. The people in Dubai don't like The Flintstones but the people in Abu Dhabi do.

I don't usually tell jokes but your post reminded me of it.

between the lines wrote:Essentially my take on the program is that there is no beginning and no end to anything. We are all an integral part of the universe and in order to be successful in this life all we have to do is whatever we have been doing already.

I haven't watched the program, but this perspective makes sense to me. There is essentially nothing we can "get wrong" because all is connected, therefore there are no external rules and there is nothing separate that "matters" -- there is only the experienced fullness of each moment. To think otherwise is to give one "something to do"... to feel right and productive and important and necessary and good and valid. However, I suspect that if we evolve beyond that particular human construct of limited "reality", we will discover that there's an even more fulfilling experience in being freed of such ideas, because then we can be more fully present and engaged in each moment of possibility on a vast playing field.

We tie our own selves up with the constructs we think.

There's much to like about the video - well done! Much work and creativity in evidence.

I do have a problem with "the universe can't exist without us" idea. That is only true if:

1) "us" refers to the entire collective of energy and the forces, or

2) "the universe" is defined as what human senses and sensibilities perceive it to be.

So, if a rogue planet annihilated the Earth next week, there would be gravitational imbalances in the solar system, but the universe would persist. Then again, the broken molecules floating in space in the aftermath of such a disaster could also be termed as "us" - still playing a role in the solar system environment.

Greta wrote:There's much to like about the video - well done! Much work and creativity in evidence.

I do have a problem with "the universe can't exist without us" idea. That is only true if:

1) "us" refers to the entire collective of energy and the forces, or

2) "the universe" is defined as what human senses and sensibilities perceive it to be.

So, if a rogue planet annihilated the Earth next week, there would be gravitational imbalances in the solar system, but the universe would persist. Then again, the broken molecules floating in space in the aftermath of such a disaster could also be termed as "us" - still playing a role in the solar system environment.

The thing I've come to realise about philosophy, Greta, is that we can talk the Universe into being whatever we like.

Harbal wrote:The thing I've come to realise about philosophy, Greta, is that we can talk the Universe into being whatever we like.

True. We can talk just about anything into or out of existence.

between the lines wrote:Here is my summary of the Alan Watts contextual seminar of Do You Do It Or Does It Do You: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbcanJOd3sU

One has to be unusual stupid in order to take this vid seriously! What he says is pure nonsense and babble, and the really big bomb comes when he says we can't exist with out the universe, and the universe can't exist without us.

All we need is the sun, and the universe doesn't need us ..FFS!!!!

you can take that statement so many ways its ridiculous.
I

HexHammer wrote: ↑Sat Dec 10, 2016 4:53 am

between the lines wrote:Here is my summary of the Alan Watts contextual seminar of Do You Do It Or Does It Do You: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbcanJOd3sU

One has to be unusual stupid in order to take this vid seriously! What he says is pure nonsense and babble, and the really big bomb comes when he says we can't exist with out the universe, and the universe can't exist without us.

All we need is the sun, and the universe doesn't need us ..FFS!!!!

Alan Watts is excellent. I'm sorry you don't 'grok' what he's on about. It would be a mistake to think that you do.

What he says is what the Buddha says, and Sadhguru, Lao Tsu, Al Hallaj, Meister Echhart, Rupert Spira, Osho, Sri Ramana Maharshi and so on.

It is not easy to grasp, but it will be impossible if you dismiss it as nonsense.

Your choice of course.

PeteJ wrote: ↑Fri Oct 09, 2020 10:01 amAlan Watts is excellent. I'm sorry you don't 'grok' what he's on about. It would be a mistake to think that you do.

What he says is what the Buddha says, and Sadhguru, Lao Tsu, Al Hallaj, Meister Echhart, Rupert Spira, Osho, Sri Ramana Maharshi and so on.

It is not easy to grasp, but it will be impossible if you dismiss it as nonsense.

Your choice of course.

Are they scientists?!?! Did Buddha have a clue??!! ............NO?!?! He was so clueless that he used scent sticks with lead, if he actually had a clue he would outlaw lead in those damn sticks!
All the did was spewing outdated stuff, and you are too gullible and naive to see any of their flaws!

HexHammer wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 4:40 am Are they scientists?!?! Did Buddha have a clue??!! ............NO?!?! He was so clueless that he used scent sticks with lead, if he actually had a clue he would outlaw lead in those damn sticks!
All the did was spewing outdated stuff, and you are too gullible and naive to see any of their flaws!

It always amazes me how keen some people are to make fools of themselves.

PeteJ wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 1:24 pmIt always amazes me how keen some people are to make fools of themselves.

You can't even explain why, just parrot puerile accusations. You simply doesn't have the mental aptitude for anything else.