Pragmatism, 应用领域, 和 the meaning of life

(我的书中出现了这篇文章的改进和更新版本 简要介绍。以下版本仅供保留。)

©vladgrin-Fotolia.com

在与人们谈论我的想法和作品时,在谈话之前是他们的朋友,广播主持人或活动经理,在谈话结束时我经常听到以下问题:“好的,但是现在人们可以 应用 所有这些都在实践中吗?最初,这个问题使我感到非常合理和合理,因此我不得不考虑答案会感到内gui和尴尬。但是当我退一步思考问题背后的动机时,关于我们文化的全新见解途径就摆在了我面前。预期本文的结论,并且暂时没有任何责任 criticise 曾经问过我这个问题的人,我认为这个问题反映了 generalized state of psychic imbalance in our culture; so 广义的 that it comes across not 只要 as perfectly normal, but appropriate 和 even smart.

最终,所有人类现实都是 内部 phenomenon 展开 in mind. Even if 那里 were indeed an 外 世界 independent of mind, all of our experiences of that 世界 would still be entirely in mind. Without the dynamics of mind, the whole universe might as well not exist. Therefore, any interaction we may have with the 'outside 世界' in the form of pragmatic 应用领域 or actions ultimately 只要 has any meaning insofar as it translates back into something 展开 in mind. 对于 instance, as a technology marketer, if I  应用  一种新的营销技术,可以为我的公司带来更多的收入,这种结果将具有人类现实感 only 就我和其他人的想法而言。 At the end of the day, it all comes back to an 内部 phenomenon in the medium of mind. The 'outside 世界' is just an intermediary step; a means to an end. Only the 内部 reality of mind can confer any meaning to human life.

现在,我的工作是对 理解,无论是否有效。它试图解决这个问题:“到底发生了什么?” 理解已经是一个内部现实。 人类心理中正在展现的格式塔,而不是所谓的“外部世界”。因此,我邀请他人通过自己的著作和演讲加入我自己的旅程,已经是我心目中的旅程。它不需要“应用程序”,因为它不是达到目的的手段,而是直接解决最终目标的方法。它不是通过回旋的,间接的方式,而是通过培育生命本身的基本要素:心灵,来丰富生活(或者我希望如此)。询问我的工作的“应用程序”类似于询问您已经在家时如何开车回家。你为什么受教育?为了能够工作。你为什么工作?去赚钱。你为什么要赚钱?买东西。你为什么要买东西? 生活并能够有一定的经验。 对,就是这样!归根结底,这就是一切 经验; 那是, 在脑海中展现出什么。其他一切都是获得经验的手段。由于 理解是框架,形状和颜色最重要的主要经验 – if not all – other experiences, why wonder about its 应用领域 as far as people's actions in the 世界 'outside?' We're already dealing with the core issue; already sitting comfortably on the couch at home. So why ask about the bus?

Even after reading the above, I bet 您 still feel that something is off with my argument; that everything should have some kind of concrete, pragmatic application in order to have any value or meaning. There is a kind of uneasiness associated to embarking on an 智力ual journey when the journey's guide tells 您 upfront that he doesn't care at all whether the journey will have any 实际的 application. But fear not, 您 aren't alone in this 感觉。 It is shared by our entire Western culture; a culture that has now infected the entire 世界, the East included, like a 病毒.

The problem is that we, Westerners, project all meaning onto the 外. 我们不再过着人类的内心生活,而开始过着事物和机制的“外在生活”。所有原因的答案都必须存在于无处不在的地方。我什至不敢冒险解释这种情况是如何发生的:由于西方唯物主义,我们相信我们是有限的人,他们将不可避免地最终不复存在。只有“外部世界”才能持久并具有连续性。正如我在正在写的第四本书中指出的那样,这不过是一个童话故事。但不管是否童话,它都会使我们将生命的所有意义投射到“外部世界”上,因为只有经久不衰的事物才有意义。尽管内部世界仍然是我们所知道的唯一现实载体,但它被视为短暂的,因此毫无意义。 这就是我们与生活联系的方式的不可持续的不平衡。我们清空了所有含义,并将其全部放置在外部。但是,即使是“外部世界”,最终还是一种抽象的思维方式。 an abstraction of the 世界 内.

When people talk to me about my ideas 和 their own philosophical speculations, I sense that, intuitively 和 deep inside, they 知道 that life, ultimately, is a journey in mind 和 nowhere else. They 知道 that what we are talking about is already it; it's already all that matters. But towards the end of the conversation, when the enchantment of the discussion wanes 和 concedes ground to the analytical ego, they seek the reassurance the ego requires in terms of finding '实际应用s.' It is as though they needed to cover that ground for completeness sake, even though their intuitive minds 知道 that everything of real importance has already been covered. They need to tick the box, like a compulsion or obsession that endures despite lacking any substance.

Life is a laboratory for exploration along 只要 two paths: 感觉 (如在爱与恐惧中) and 理解。 除了作为回味的手段,没有别的东西存在。 “技巧”唤起感觉和理解。 All meaning resides in the emotions 和 comprehension 展开 . 虽然我作为一个人也走了 感觉 像我们其他人一样,我的写作集中在 理解。 Are 那里 实际的 应用领域 for my philosophy? Probably 那里 are many. However, in my current phase, I can't care to elaborate on them, because I see them as means to an end that I am already tackling 直。 So if 您 are looking for recipes, techniques, 和 other pragmatic procedures to 应用 to the 世界 'outside,' I am not 您r man. But if 您 think the 世界 can 只要 change when human beings make peace with, 和 nurture, their 情怀 同时推进他们的 理解 自我和现实,然后让我们喝啤酒。
分享:

44条评论:

  1. Interesting post;一次我也倾向于同意。但是我把这种哲学的弧度带到了钟摆的全速前进。 Now, I find it ironic that 您r response to the question, "accusing"由...引起的问题"virus"西方二元论的根深蒂固,也充满了西方的偏见。

    //最终,所有人类现实都是 内部 phenomenon 展开 in mind. Even if 那里 were indeed an 外 世界 independent of mind, all of our experiences of that 世界 would still be entirely in mind.//

    是的,没有。现实比这更细微。当有人问:"'好的,但是现在,人们如何在实践中应用所有这些?'",将其视为基于西方的自我欺骗是一种确定的方式,可以让自己和您的作品脱颖而出,以促使他们变得无关紧要。它'当您身材矮胖,年轻,可以轻松享受其数字便利的西方文化时,这是一回事,而当您无家可归,没有博客,在刚果,叙利亚或在贫困期间陷入贫困时,则是另一回事底特律的冬天,无力支付所需的药品,医疗保健或热量。您似乎要描述的现实是我们出生的那一天(根据我对宇宙的当前理解)留下的现实。我们作为人类生活的那个'至少在乎我们是否"think positive"或什么都不要想。一旦您'死了,这个世界也许为*你*而消失了,但对我们其他人而言却不是。

    Unless 您 can do a better job answering that question, I'm afraid 您r offer of beer is going to be met with the commensurate question: "Who's paying?"

    //Because of Western 材料ism, we believe we are finite beings who will, unavoidably, eventually cease to exist. Only the 'outside 世界'将忍受并具有连续性。正如我在写的第四本书中所论述的那样,这不过是一个童话故事。

    不,这不是't true. 那 kind of western dualism, in fact, represents a tiny minority.不论西方科学'作为哲学基础,绝大多数西方居民都相信一种二元论,在这种二元论中"here"还有一个叫做"there", or "Heaven", or "Hell", or some other "thereness"由神,众神或通用替代品统治-更高的力量。

    当我们'是人类,告诉自己那里'根据我们的经验,没有现实是否认使这一事实成为现实的事情。"plane of existence" (if that'就是您想称呼它的东西)那么具有挑战性(如果不感到恐惧)。无论'幻觉与否,我们'重新参与并按照其条款生活。魔术思维赢了't cut it. 对于 all intents 和 purposes: We are finite beings who age, grow sick, are subject to accident 和 indifference, in a 世界 (a 材料 世界) which will indifferently go whether 您 live or die in the next minute.

    回复 删除
    回覆
    1. 我发现很难对您所说的话发表评论,因为您不是 '我真的不是在争论你的案子,但我感觉到你的苦涩和挫败感是基于你自己的哲学结论。您也歪曲了我写的内容。我说的不是幻想,而是经验的现实。如果有的话,这是不可否认的。我没有提到任何神奇的想法。你从哪儿得到的?我只是说,唯一真正重要的现实是经验的现实,我完全支持这一现实,因为在我看来,这是一个非常合理的主张。毕竟,任何人从未经历过的事情都不可能重要,对吗?我认为,我的主张无论存在论是现实主义还是理想主义都是真实的,都可以成立。那'这就是为什么我使用表达式'_human_ reality,'而不是简单地'reality.'

      >>一次我也倾向于同意。但是我把这种哲学的弧度带到了钟摆的全速前进。

      The hubris 这里 is palpable but, unfortunately, it means absolutely nothing as far as an argument against my 点.

      >> Now, I find it ironic that 您r response to the question, "accusing"由...引起的问题"virus"西方二元论的根深蒂固,也充满了西方的偏见。

      Care to explain why this is so? As it is, this is merely an arbitrary statement that 我不't recognize at all.

      >> dismissing it as Western-based self-delusion is a sure way to relegate 您rself 和 您r writings to prompt irrelevance.

      我没有't relegate to self-delusion all attempts to find 实际的 应用领域 for ideas. Practical 应用领域 keep the 'world' going. I have dedicated most of my life to 实际的 应用领域, developing technology 和 science, 和 then marketing them. My life is a monument to 实际的 applicability 和 pragmatism. However, to expect EVERYTHING to have a 实际的 application in the 'outside 世界'我认为这代表了心理上的失衡。我认为确实如此的原因正是我在帖子中提出的观点。不幸的是,您没有试图在逻辑上打败我的论点。

      Regarding my relegating myself to irrelevance, I respect that as 您r opinion. I do take the liberty to disagree with it, however. If I become irrelevant to 您, that would be a pity; but I would be in peace with that. I have no illusions that I can communicate in a way that resonates with everyone. Nor am I trying. My 只要 criterion is to be always authentic 和 honest with what I really think 和 feel, 和 try to communicate that as well as I can.

      >>不论西方科学'作为哲学基础,绝大多数西方居民相信二元论

      Religious belief is not 内部ized belief of the kind that unconsciously determines how we relate to life. 人y believe in the reality of the soul 和 eternal life in heaven, yet will endure the most horrific medical treatments to prolongue life for a few more weeks; or plunge into agony at the loss of loved ones. 您 are mixing up egoic beliefs with unconscious drives. We 知道, from depth psychology, that these are entirely different things.

      I am surprised by the tone of 您r comment. Somehow, what I wrote did reach 您 deeply, just in an unexpected way, I guess. But that's 您r own trip, not mine.

      删除
    2. Re-reading 您r post, I guess I now understand what 您 meant when 您 said that my position is itself steeped in Western culture. 您 大概 explained it 这里:

      "It'当您身材矮胖,年轻,可以轻松享受其数字便利的西方文化时,这是一回事,而当您无家可归,没有博客,在刚果,叙利亚或在贫困期间陷入贫困时,则是另一回事底特律的冬天,无力支付所需的药品,医疗保健或热量。您似乎要描述的现实是我们出生的那一天(根据我对宇宙的当前理解)留下的现实。我们作为人类生活的那个'至少在乎我们是否"think positive"或什么都不要想。一旦您'死了,这个世界也许为*你*而消失了,但对我们其他人而言却不是。"

      您 seem to be making of my post a lot, but a whole LOT more than what it actually says. Maybe 您'我评论了你对我所说的话的幻想;而不是我的意思。例如,您的推断我以某种方式建议'positive thinking'变化现实完全是幻觉。如果有的话,我一直非常反对那种自我幻想可以改变现实的想法,即使是在理想主义下也是如此。一世'已经在书籍和文章中对此进行了介绍。

      Nor am I denying the importance of 实际的 action to improve the 世界 we live in. Yet, that 实际的 action is 只要 meaningful when it is experienced by conscious human beings. If 您 do something to help the Congolese or the Syrians, but 您r actions are not experienced by anyone, 您 might as well have done nothing. My 点 is that the 只要 reality that counts is that which is experienced. The suffering of the Congolese 和 the Syrians is experienced, so it counts.

      I never made a blanket statement against all forms of pragmatism. My statement was that 那里 is more to the value of ideas than just their potential 实际的 应用领域. And 那里 are very valuable ideas that have NO 实际的 application in the 'outside 世界,'但是非常有价值,因为它们以某种直接的方式丰富了经验。而且,归根结底,重要的是经验。

      I confess to be confused with 您r comment. I guess 您 projected onto my post ideas that 您 had 您rself but eventually discarded as naive. But in that process, 您 lost from sight what I actually wrote 和 could 只要 see 您r own projections.

      删除
    3. Hi 贝纳多, I'm certainly not bitter or frustrated, though I can understand how 您 might read that tone into the text of the response. I'm just not pulling any punches. I write strongly worded dissent because I respect 您, admire 您r writing 和 want to challenge 您 in order to get at what 您'真的在想和我've enjoyed 您r clarifications.

      //宗教信仰不是那种无意识地决定我们与生活的关系的内在信仰。许多人相信灵魂和天堂永生的现实,但会忍受最恐怖的药物来延长寿命几周... //

      Excellent 点.

      //the 体验的现实; which is undeniable if anything ever was. I talked of no magical thinking whatsoever; where did 您 get that from anyway?//

      From the specific thrust of 您r argument:

      "I think the question is 荒诞 和 reveals a 广义的 state of psychic imbalance in our culture; so 广义的 that it comes across not 只要 as perfectly normal, but appropriate 和 even smart."

      我个人认为有人问这个问题:'好的,但是现在,人们如何在实践中应用所有这些?'"absurd"断然认为,在某种意义上,问题背后的务实和实际需求是无关紧要的或虚幻的。我认为任何可以(您似乎要提出)的哲学都可以'不能回答这个问题,是'非常有用(甚至可能值得拥有)。一个人需要生活在现实世界中。否则,为什么要住在里面呢?

      //I talked of no illusion, but of the 体验的现实//

      是的,但是如果"体验的现实"胜过这个问题"...人们如何在实践中应用所有这些?",然后引发相关性和神奇思维的问题。对于某些人来说"体验的现实"问题所隐含的现实。

      //您似乎在撰写我的文章很多,但是比实际所说的要多得多。 //

      是。自然。

      删除
    4. 嗨,帕特里克,

      >>我个人认为有人问这个问题:'好的,但是现在,人们如何在实践中应用所有这些?'"absurd"断然认为,在某种意义上,问题背后的务实和实际需求是无关紧要的或虚幻的。我认为任何可以(您似乎要提出)的哲学都可以'不能回答这个问题,是'非常有用(甚至可能值得拥有)。一个人需要生活在现实世界中。否则,为什么要住在里面呢?<<

      我明白你在说什么。但是我会在这里坚持下去。当一个人谈论现实,自我以及两者之间关系的基本本质时,一个人在谈论存在和内在生命的最基本方面。然后跟进这样的讨论'是的,但是我该如何在实践中应用它?'不仅是大规模的反气候运动,而且似乎完全错过了整个主题的意义。它'类似于结束关于人类未来的讨论'是的,但是今晚我们晚餐要吃什么?' It'就像有条件的文化反射一样。

      I do think it is unbalanced to expect EVERYTHING, every idea or concept, to have a 实际的 application in the 'outside 世界.' But if 您 define '实际应用'是的,作为丰富的经验,然后这个问题就完全成立了。 In my post, however, I defined '实际应用'作为行动'outside 世界.'

      所有这些都说明,也许我的语言比通常所需的语言更加敏锐。但是话又说回来,有时夸大效果很重要。

      删除
    5. Thanks 贝纳多; 和 fair enough.

      Now to put myself in 您r shoes. Question: "人们如何在实践中应用所有这些?"

      那'这是一个艰苦而棘手的问题,但我不会't say that it's 荒诞. I think 您 arrived at a better answer in 您r last reponse: "...if 您 define '实际应用'是的,作为丰富的经验,然后这个问题就完全成立了。" I'我猜对于许多人来说,对材料的追求恰恰是-丰富的经验。也许不同之处在于他们是否认识到这一点?

      删除
    6. Yes, the pursuit of the 材料 is, in my view, nothing but an enrichment of experience through projection. But it is not the ONLY way to enrich experience. In my view, it'当所有其他更直接的丰富经验的方式由于我们的眩光而变得对我们的文化无能为力时,这是一种损失'practical.'

      删除
  2. 贝纳多,

    PGillespie's response to the 点 that 您 are making in 您r speculations above brought a smile of recognition, or better said, in the spirit of 您r presentation's underlying theme, I RE-EXPERIENCED my own EXPERIENCE of the conundrum that 贝纳多 finds himself in regard to "How do I answer this post by PGillespie 和 does he have a question for me to answer? Or did he get my 点? Or is playing to the crowd? Or, gee I must have hit a raw nerve in this guy?

    这些年来,对于我来说,同样的困惑时刻已经发生了无数次。通常作为大学的客座讲师并在专业会议上发言。

    学生或同事总是插话并继续'hold court'2分钟或更长时间。如果人们在演讲中感到生气或无聊,这个难题就会放大,怎么可能不"grateful, entranced" by my "pearls of wisdom"? ;>)?

    经过反复试验,我经过了几分钟的独白,然后进行了干预。

    首先我问"Do 您 have a question?".

    第二,"Please mirror back to me in 90 seconds or less, what 您 heard as my primary objectives that I stated at the beginning this session. 您 have a handout that I gave 您.

    第三,如果他们对前两个问题给出了连贯的答案,那么他们在这方面想问,澄清或反驳的是什么。

    Otherwise, I had no way to respond coherently when presented with incongruent anger 和 irrelevant conclusions. The rant typically shifts in tone into an imperial sigh,bored disdain 和 droning or scolding me (The World?) for 2 minutes 和 never asking a question or refuting a 点.

    我的大部分执业经历是作为心理治疗师与人们进行临床接触。我受过训练,能够理解并善于处理投射,分裂,自恋伤害等防御问题。

    PGillespie是位人类,正在回应自己的内在道路,似乎充满了不止几个轴。

    我对他的帖子的阅读是"What did he seem to get from 您r speculations. He is bringing things into his post that are tangential, unrelated,and even seems to agree with 您 but the agreement lacks nuance 和 depth.

    On the other hand, PGillespie is just like me. I have done, 和 continue to do what he seems to be doing. Ranting my own monadic rants, missing the 点, grinding axes. I 知道 these things. I have done them more often than I am aware of doing them,


    贝纳多, it is 2012 和 I really do wish that aliens will land on the White House lawn on December 21st. (irony please). It'这不是我渴望的外部事件,现实中白宫草坪上的外星人对整个人类来说都是灾难性的奇数。但它'如果我本身渴望的话,那真的不是'. I want to EXPERIENCE what that catyclismic event would FEEL like to me 和 to 您 和 ad infinatum.....

    荣格在1913年做到了's chronicled in The Red Book. He EXPERIENCED the Collective Horror of Epic Proportion in the precognitive state of his Active Imagination, his shamanic descent is Jung EXPERIENCING the Two World Wars over the next 4 decades that were 展开 in front of him in 1913.

    eveyone的基准不是事件,它是'我的活动经历。我们个人和集体感觉到事件,奇迹般地自我反省。我是一个经验丰富的迷!


    里克


    回复 删除
    回覆
    1. We both 知道 I need not reply with words but just the tacit recognition implied by silence. But since the rest of the 世界 may construe a lack of response 这里 as a sign that I might be ignoring 您r message, 这里 您 are. :-)
      PS: There are syncronicities in 您r message. But let's save it for later!

      删除
  3. "当我作为一个人也像我们其他人一样走着感觉的道路时,我的写作集中在理解的道路上。"

    I can go along with to a certain extent, but can 您 really separate the two paths in a meaningful sense? Here's what I mean.

    In 您r search for 理解, why do 您 choose to focus on certain topics rather than others? It's because those subjects have *meaning* for 您, right? They *feel* important.

    So 您r 理解 is tightly focused on whatever subjects or slants evoke a certain 感觉 in 您, 和 in that respect, isn't 感觉 more fundamental than what 您'重新呼吁理解?最终,是'它与它密不可分吗?

    Whatever 您r answer may be, I appreciate the emphasis 您 often place on the emotional life, as suggested by:

    "我们停止了人类的内心生活,开始过着'outer life'事物和机制。"

    我个人发展的很大一部分是我在Arthur Janov的经历'的原始疗法。对我来说,这是对我自己感受的重新介绍-当我感到悲伤时学会哭泣,当我感到悲伤时表达愤怒'是适当的,而不是逃避我的恐惧,而是承认并经历它,以便我不't (as they say) "act it out."

    回复 删除
    回覆
    1. 是的,我过分简单了。也许更好的比喻是说'heart'和的路径'intellect'?也许不吧。从某种意义上说,理解也是一种感觉。那's为什么我试图通过写作来解释更多'like love 和 fear'在两句之间,以说明我的意思是'feeling.'我想我在这里绕着字跳舞,但希望您对我的意思有一个直觉。有两个关键'streams'生活,可以这么说。他们不是't really separated, but they can be identified. One has more to do with 理解 things in a rather 智力ual way, 和 it requires a certain 'stepping out'它的。另一个与情感上的感觉有关,这需要一定的沉浸感。尽管我认识到我像每个人一样都拥有这两者,但我还是以自己的写作风格来强调前者。我想诗人会强调后者。

      删除
    2. Idries Shah used to talk a lot about 心 理解 和 head 理解。 The latter is ultimately unsatisfying, like trying to eat a delicious meal that 只要 exists as an illustration in a glossy magazine. Oh, 您 can do it maybe with pure mathematics, but not much else. Heart 理解, on the other hand, is like eating the meal 和 gaining actual nutrition from it.

      从这个意义上说,我'我是一个经验丰富的迷;我想我们都是。那里'毫无疑问,像我的计算机这样的外部工件可以极大地方便我寻找下一个修复程序,并且有些作家(您就是Bernardo)经常可以提供这些知识。它'如果有人的话绝对可惜'生活条件意味着他们可以 't indulge their thirst to the same extent I can, 和 I fully applaud 实际的 应用领域 that, in the end, provide them with the means to do that. Roll on the end to poverty, so that people have at least some leisure time 和 the means to explore what their 心 really desires; which might be difficult if the main worry is where the next meal is coming from.

      但是你不是't, as 您've指出,贬低外部应用程序,并且具有欣赏经验并希望他人这样做的经验,这是开发此类应用程序的强烈动机,而不是出于它们本身的目的,而是出于它们可以为他人创造机会的方式。别人分享快乐。那'例如教育的全部内容。它增强了一个'的外部机会,但是如果利用这些机会't lead to 内部 exploration. What doth it profit a man if he gains the whole 世界, 和 all that.

      The main force of what 您 say in 您r initial post is just so obviously true, that I can'看不到如何获得。一世've 大概 thought along similar lines myself, but 您'我说得特别好。

      迈克尔·拉金(Michael Larkin)

      删除
    3. Thanks, Michael. What 您 say reminded me strongly of an essay I wrote a while back...
      http://www.yiqimaicha.com/2011/05/some-thoughts-on-education.html
      我们有相同的想法。

      删除
  4. I've heard Alan Watts remark before that meditation is the one thing 您 can do that has no 实际的 value, 和 that's the entire 点.

    回复 删除
    回覆
    1. 不错的参考,是的... :-)瓦特很棒。

      删除
    2. Although my 理解 is that this is no longer true. Researchers *have* found 实际的 cognitive 和 generally health-related value to meditation; although some might argue, I suppose, that such benefits aren't strictly "practical".

      删除
    3. 贝纳多'这篇文章触及了我在更广泛的属灵寻求者社区中经常听到的对话。它通常按照以下方式分解"cultivating inner 知道ledge" versus "self help."许多人从事各种精神实践,因为他们认为自己会从中得到一些好处,例如内心的平静和幸福。因此,如果您对灵性的态度与您尝试减轻体重的方法相同,那么您可以从事多种活动,例如冥想。如果您想打坐,以便更好地健康,那's fine. But that isn'与培养理解相同。

      删除
  5. 贝纳多, I understand 您r reaction against 实际的 应用领域 of 您r philosophy, if 您 view ‘practical’ as 材料, ie “这种理解如何使我的身体生活更好”. However, if I were asking 您 this question I would pose the question as how can this 知道ledge further my 精神 progress or help me further the 精神 progress of others. This is how I evaluate all information; I am not interested in any philosophical arguments that do not have some 实际的 application. And again, just to be clear 这里, I define 实际的 as helping to develop 精神ly.

    It is fine to be a philosopher exploring ideas for the sake of it, in the same way that an artist creates paintings. We enjoy looking at these creations, they inspire us, 和 everyone can get something different from the experience. Any form of creation is very beneficial, it is what consciousness does. I wonder whether 您 think of what 您 are doing as creation? Are 您 not creating metaphors to help clarify our consciousness?

    Would this sum up what 您 are trying to get across? – “people ask ‘what is the 点 of the journey’, missing the fact that the journey is the 点 of life”.

    如果唯一存在的是意识,那么说唯一‘point’意识是提高意识质量?这里‘quality’ is something that needs definition, but hopefully 您 get my 点. If the purpose is to increase the 质量 of consciousness, any new 知道ledge should increase the 质量 of consciousness. If everyone’s 质量 of consciousness increased, even by a small amount, the physical 世界 would be radically changed. When asked what is the 实际的 application would this not be a valid answer?


    回复 删除
    回覆
    1. 嗨,斯图尔特,

      >> if 您 view ‘practical’ as 材料, ie “这种理解如何使我的身体生活更好”. <<

      对,就那个's how I defined it.

      >> However, if I were asking 您 this question I would pose the question as how can this 知道ledge further my 精神 progress or help me further the 精神 progress of others. <<

      留下棘手的单词的定义'spiritual' aside, yes, any philosophy should be able to do that if it has any value. So I hope my philosophy helps people in that way. In my post, 我没有't consider this a '实际应用,'但是,因为我对a的定义'实际应用'是物理上发生的事情'outside 世界.'

      >> I wonder whether 您 think of what 您 are doing as creation? Are 您 not creating metaphors to help clarify our consciousness? <<

      也许,尽管我对这个词犹豫不决'creation.'这个词可能太强了...也许这个词'realization'更好,因为它'更加含糊不清... :-)

      >> Would this sum up what 您 are trying to get across? – “people ask ‘what is the 点 of the journey’, missing the fact that the journey is the 点 of life”. <<

      Not sure if I would sum it up that way. Maybe I would just say: the 点 of what I am trying to do is to figure out what is going on... just that. :-)

      >> 如果唯一存在的是意识,那么说唯一‘point’ of consciousness is to increase the 质量 of consciousness? <<

      是!

      >> When asked what is the 实际的 application would this not be a valid answer? <<

      If 您 define 实际的 in this way, surely yes! In the post, I defined '实际应用' as some action in the physical 世界.

      删除
    2. Thanks for the reply 贝纳多. I find it interesting that 您 define 实际的 in such a dualist way :-) One definition of 实际的 is "为实际使用而改装或设计;有用:". If 知道ledge isn'比我建议的有用't 知道ledge. But 我不'不想陷入语义上的泥潭。

      不会't 您 agree that improving consciousness has an effect in the physical 世界? So improving the 质量 of our consciousness has a indirect 实际的 effect. I think 您're selling 您rself short 这里, 您 are having an impact on the physical 世界.

      人们问的大多数问题'没有道理。我认为有时候我们需要看看过去的问题,看看人们真正在问什么。它's fine if 您 don't want to focus on the 实际的 应用领域, 那里 are plenty of people who do that. But to suggest that the question is 荒诞 seems like a trivial semantic 点 和 doesn'解决更深层的问题。

      An artist would not deconstruct their work, they will not tell 您 what 您 are supposed to get from it, 和 that is fine, they want everyone to get what they need to get. But they wouldn'永远不要说问题毫无意义。

      顺便说一句,谢谢你今天激发我这个问题的想法:-)


      删除
    3. 二元论是一个很难解决的难题。 :-)是的,我使用了二元论的比喻,所以我可以将它与人们问我如何应用我的东西时的思考方式联系起来'in practice.' The context 这里 is that I am asked this by e.g. conference organizers, where the attendance is looking for techniques to be more creative, or more effective at work, etc. But in trying to speak their language, I incur into dualism, which, as 您 知道, 我不't订阅。一切都是头脑。

      但是头脑可以通过外向的投射和内向的内省来行动。两者的确是心灵,但它们代表着不同的心灵过程。从这个意义上说,心中本身就有一种二元论,我们将其与物质与精神之间的字面二元论混淆了。因此,我的观点是,我的工作重点是内向内省,而不是外向投影。我的工作不是技巧,而是洞察力。我对本文的希望以及对问题的夸张描述'absurd,'正是为了提高人们对这种心态二元论的认识,所以人们不'别忘了内省内省也具有巨大且更直接的价值。并非所有的价值都在于外向的投射。

      删除
    4. >> so people don'别忘了内省型内在也具有巨大,更直接的价值

      I think this is what people are asking of 您. What is this value? 那 would certainly be my question.

      我对大多数哲学的最初反应是"so what"例如理想主义"so what", what does it mean to me, the physical 世界 still seems to be out 那里, I am still (usually) restricted by the idea of physical 材料ism. I'我不是说我不'我不会从这些想法中获得任何有价值的东西,否则我不会't be 这里), I'我只是说问某物的价值是一个有效的问题。它's a question I ask myself about every new area of 知道ledge I come across.

      删除
    5. >> I think this is what people are asking of 您. What is this value? 那 would certainly be my question. <<

      是的,相反,我从未否认过这种主观价值。我的帖子是关于'outside 世界,'例如如何赚更多的钱,在男女中更受欢迎等等。

      不过,我不't feel I have to spoon-feed everyone when it comes to figuring out whether 那里 is subjective value in someone'哲学... ;-)主观价值是个人的东西。我就它们的价值分享想法...人们必须自己弄清楚它对他们有什么主观价值。例如:

      >>对我来说意味着什么<<

      is a question that 只要 the 'me' can answer.

      >> I'我只是说问某物的价值是一个有效的问题。<<

      Yes, I never denied that. My post was about 应用领域 in the ;outside 世界'...

      删除
  6. 'I'我只是说问某物的价值是一个有效的问题。它's a question I ask myself about every new area of 知道ledge I come across.'

    啊,正好!如果有人要构建一个例如天堂般丰富插图的图画,我会问那幅图画的价值是什么,或者'人们如何在实践中应用所有这些?'我希望我的问题可以理解为:'OK, 您've pontificated. Now what can anyone do with what 您 have said? 您 have given me nothing with which I might continue to think about heaven-ness.'

    And at last my 点: I sense in questions like '人们如何应用它?'指责什么'you' said has left 'me' cold: I am not 只要 not persuaded by its truth, I am not even intrigued by it, for it makes no connection with any ontology I 知道, 和 so I can do nothing with it. (The other thing I sense in this question is an admission along these lines: 'I have not understood a word 您 said, 和 I am just asking a stock question to mask this fact.)

    回复 删除
    回覆
    1. >> OK, 您've pontificated. <<

      我是'令人赞叹... ;-)我'我只是分享假设和想法。艾伦·沃茨(Alan Watts)曾经说过'不卖任何东西,说他是一个娱乐者;人们看待他的演讲和书籍的方式应该与看音乐会的音乐家一样。我用他自己的话说。一世'我只是分享想法的价值,就像音乐家分享他的音乐一样。

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82OpDZ9tAho

      >> I have not understood a word 您 said, 和 I am just asking a stock question to mask this fact <<

      嗯...有时候确实是这样...

      删除
  7. Based on 您r feedback, I removed the word 'absurd' from the post. I agree it was too sharp a word. And it was unnecessary to the 点 anyway.

    回复 删除
    回覆
    1. 很高兴听见。我也认为没有必要。

      此外,将意义投射到"outside 世界"与相关性问题或"the 实际的"。我认为原始帖子错误地将两者混为一谈(或waasn'足够清晰以防止出现相同情况),尽管当我最初回答时,我当时并没有'确保如何构筑这一奇观。

      删除
  8. 贝纳多, I'm definitely up for that beer 您 mention (except for the fact that I can't stand beer!). 对于 me, the kind of ideas 您 explore are intrinsically valuable. Matters of truth 和 meaning are intrinsically important. Characterizing them as mere means to a more concrete end profoundly misses the 点.

    I started out my adult life wanting to do something much like what 您 do. But events intervened 和 I ended up having a career as a 精神 teacher, teaching people with almost no interest in issues 和 ideas like the ones 您 explore. With few exceptions, they would find 您r writings too abstract, too 智力ual, too impractical. I often feel like I live on a different planet from my audience.

    结果-我'll be honest--I have accumulated a fair amount of resentment over the demand for 实际的ity. Yet I have also had to stretch to make peace with whatever truth is in that demand, 和 I do believe 那里 is truth in it (though not 只要 truth!).

    我了解到的是"practicality" comes in different forms. One form, as 您 mention, is 实际的 results on the physical level. But a second form is wisdom for living, 和 people are intensely interested in that second form.

    这种智慧可以像一个人一样抽象's emotional orientation to God, physical events, past 和 future, other people, 和 oneself. Our emotional orientation toward those things defines our lives, 和 that orientation is all about the meaning we assign to them. 那 meaning is usually not articulated, but it can be articulated 和 it can be changed. The result is a different emotional orientation to life, a 实际的 result that trumps any mere physical results.

    和我一样,大多数人'm sure 您 well 知道, will have a hard time getting their emotional teeth into 您r 世界view. However, my experience is that if 您 can bring it down to its implications for one's emotional orientation toward that list I gave in the previous paragraph, suddenly people will become intensely interested in ideas--as ideas. Indeed, what I find is that when I go the next step 和 give them 实际的 exercises for 应用 ing those ideas on a more inward/experiential, or even behavioral level, their interest level actually goes down (which to me betrays a hypocrisy in the message "give us the 实际的"). It'当我们谈论纯粹的想法时,它处于鼎盛时期。

    My experience is that this form of 实际的ity could be utilized far more in circles that explore the intersection between the 智力ual/scientific 和 the 精神. 对于 instance, when people talk about the 实际的 benefits of the survival of consciousness, they generally don'似乎没有意识到,一种超越身体的意识,甚至可能是永恒的意识,在整体上拥有更多的地位和价值,而我们每时每刻都对我们的地位和价值提出质疑。改变这些问题的答案,您就会改变我们对自己的情感取向。同时,您会改变我们对他人的情感取向,因为我们对他人的感受是基于我们对他人价值的评估。

    My 点 is that 您 could basically say, "I'm not interested in 材料 实际的ity," but then add, "But I believe that these ideas are 实际的 in the fullest sense of the word. Our experience is largely composed of the meanings we assign to reality, God, the past, the future, physical events, other people, 和 ourselves. And the 世界view I am arguing for allows us to assign a very different meaning to every one of those things, 和 thus dramatically change our experience. Here, let me show 您 怎么样。.."

    Now it may be that in 您r books 您 already do that, or that 您 aren't interested in doing that. But 您r post touched on something I'我已经奋斗了30年,我不能't help offering what's come out of that.

    回复 删除
    回覆
    1. 罗伯特

      我完全同意您的职位。"practicality"在高度意义上意味着人类内部运动"看世界生活"。盖布瑟(Gebser)写作他的20世纪伟大著作的运动或假设。"unfolding"人类意识的模式"从(自然)或盖布瑟(Gebser)刚出现(勉强)自我反省's term "Ever Present Origin 和 unfolded into the Archiac, Mythical, Magical 和 present day Rational/Newtonian Mode. Gebser 点s toward the 展开 of a new mode. It may currently be happening but is still unseen by most human beings. Some humans are EXPERIENCING this new mode.L

      anguage limits us to our current mode 和 the next mode may/will require a change from noun based English,for example. English is great for naming,measuring, conceptualizing 和 passing on culture 和 writing sacred texts that metaphorically 点 toward the ineffable. But even quantum phycists are falling into process forms of language to describe the quantum 世界.

      作为人类,我们拥有从无处不在的起源之光到古族身份的所有模式,再到我们继续梦dream以求的神话模式,再到魔幻世界,我们再次进入梦境,催眠状态和创造状态在冥想中以及在我们各种形式的艺术和异世界中'visions'并且我们有能力体验无限和新颖的变幻莫测的状态。

      托马斯·库恩'术语范式转换是适用的。人类必须以一种基本的方式进行根本的改变,使人类的生活充满生机和自我意识。现在似乎正在发生,我们已经嵌入其中,但是'文化现实隧道'没有新的东西就无法整合这些变化 "基于存在过程文化的语言无法大规模整合这一转变,因此对于大多数人类来说,"off the radar"。相信我(或不相信...我可能在撒谎;>)) 那里 are many who FEEL 和 wordlessly EXPERIENCE this 展开 new mode of fundamentally what it is like to be a Human Being.

      我说这是谨慎添加的警告,如果我们不这样做的话'在地球完全融合之前,先破坏地球,然后破坏我们自己。

      删除
    2. 罗伯特

      I truly appreciate 您r comment, feedback, 和 advice.

      >>我了解到的是"practicality" comes in different forms. One form, as 您 mention, is 实际的 results on the physical level. But a second form is wisdom for living, 和 people are intensely interested in that second form. <<

      Yes. The intent of my post was to say that value is not restricted to the first form of 实际的ity 您 mention, but that 那里 is also enormous, 和 more direct, value in what 您 refer to as the second form of 实际的ity.

      >>这种智慧可以像一个人一样抽象's emotional orientation to God, physical events, past 和 future, other people, 和 oneself. Our emotional orientation toward those things defines our lives, 和 that orientation is all about the meaning we assign to them. 那 meaning is usually not articulated, but it can be articulated 和 it can be changed. The result is a different emotional orientation to life, a 实际的 result that trumps any mere physical results. <<

      YES! I agree completely. I tried to capture of what 您 said above in this passage of my post:

      "其他一切都是获得经验的手段。而且由于了解是最主要的体验,因此框架,形状和颜色– 如果不是全部 –其他经验,为什么对人们的应用感到好奇's actions in the 世界 'outside?'"

      But 您 put it in a much more cogent 和 palpable way than I did. I hope everyone who reads the post reads 您r comment.

      >> My 点 is that 您 could basically say, "I'm not interested in 材料 实际的ity," but then add, "But I believe that these ideas are 实际的 in the fullest sense of the word. Our experience is largely composed of the meanings we assign to reality, God, the past, the future, physical events, other people, 和 ourselves. And the 世界view I am arguing for allows us to assign a very different meaning to every one of those things, 和 thus dramatically change our experience. Here, let me show 您 怎么样。.." <<

      我认为这是一个很好的建议,我会以诚挚和感谢的态度接受。一世 '在我第一次获得机会时,将其应用于实践(双关语意)。

      Thank 您.

      删除
    3. >>人类必须以一种基本的方式进行根本的改变,使人类的生活充满生机和自我意识。现在似乎正在发生,我们已经嵌入其中,但是'文化现实隧道'没有新的东西就无法整合这些变化 "基于存在的语言。<<

      为...开发一种新语言的艰巨挑战'aperspectival' 世界... a language not dependent on subject/object, verb/noum, I/you, 和 past/future dualities...

      删除
    4. 好我知道'll continue to be the dissident voice. 贝纳多, even in all 您r responses, 您 still haven't been able to answer the question that irritated 您 so much: "'好的,但是现在,人们如何在实践中应用所有这些?'" 您've gotten a number of responses assuring 您 that it's OK that 您 can't answer the question, or that 您 can massage the meaning of "practical",但没有任何明确答案的问题。

      删除
    5. 哦,是的[微笑]我看到了你的最后一段。总之,您的意思是您尝试拿起蛋糕并也吃了。你说有"probably" 实际的 应用领域, but 您 didn'不在乎详细说明;但是无论如何,你当时'提供食谱,技巧或实用的"程序(尽管不是您不能't) but that nevertheless (and 实际的ly speaking of course) 您r suggestions might nevertheless bring about 世界 change. Quite a summation! 您 don'我介意你肘一下吗?

      删除
    6. 我不't mind at all, but 您 seem to be missing the 点 of the post entirely... 您'重新声称我没有't yet articulated the 实际的 application of my philosophy in the physical, 'outside' 世界, while the 点 of the article is to argue why 我不'认为这是必要甚至重要的。 :-)

      I'd乐于阐明'applications'在罗伯特提出的框架下我的哲学:

      "I'm not interested in 材料 实际的ity," but then add, "But I believe that these ideas are 实际的 in the fullest sense of the word. Our experience is largely composed of the meanings we assign to reality, God, the past, the future, physical events, other people, 和 ourselves. And the 世界view I am arguing for allows us to assign a very different meaning to every one of those things, 和 thus dramatically change our experience. Here, let me show 您 怎么样。.."

      我当然可以在决赛之后填写页面"how." I won't due it 这里 because that's not the appropriate space 和 neither is that the 点 of the post. An articulation like this requires the context of what my philosophy actually is, before I start talking about how it changes one's inner life.

      删除
    7. //我不't mind at all, but 您 seem to be missing the 点 of the post entirely... 您'重新声称我没有't yet articulated the 实际的 application of my philosophy in the physical, 'outside' 世界, while the 点 of the article is to argue why 我不'认为这是必要甚至重要的。 :-)//

      True, but 您've written a good deal since 您r post; 和 您r endorsement of Robert's的报价是矛盾的。"I'm not interested in 材料 实际的ity...but I believe that these ideas are 实际的 in the fullest sense of the word."

      这个词的最完整含义包括:

      1.属于或关于实践或行动的
      [1913 Webster]

      2.能够被使用或记帐;有用的
      distinction from ideal or theoretical; as, 实际的
      化学。"Man's 实际的 理解。" --South. "For
      all 实际的 purposes." --Macaulay.
      [1913 Webster]

      3. Evincing practice or skill; capable of 应用 ing 知道ledge
      to some useful end; as, a 实际的 man; a 实际的 mind.
      [1913 Webster]

      4. Derived from practice; as, 实际的 skill.
      [1913 Webster]

      这个词的完整含义包括"material 实际的ity". So, what this tells me is that 您 want 您r cake 和 您 want to eat it too (in the sense that 您r follow up comments undercut the assertions of 您r original post). 我不't mind. I'm just 点ing out how I read 您 so far.

      我的立场是's a mistake to parse 实际的ity the way 您 do (or to divorce 您r philosophy from the so-called "material" 世界); but I'm 愿意被说服. As it is, 您r post strikes me as being primarily apologetic 和 您 seem unwilling to concede the very question 您 dismissed. Again, that's just how I'm reading 您.

      删除
    8. Now, in my perception, 您'重新梳理和挑剔。我认为它's abundantly clear what Robert meant, 和 how I am using his statement. There is abundant context to make its meaning unambiguous. So 我不't think this particular thread with 您 is going anywhere productive now.

      Regarding 您r '愿意被说服'关于我的哲学的适用性's great. But it's imperative that first 您 知道 my philosophy! It cannot be compressed into one post or a few comments. I think most people who 知道 my philosophy won'不需要问的问题'applicability.' Maybe 您 wanna give it a go?

      删除
    9. 您'非常宽容,伯纳德。我怀疑吉莱斯皮先生'他的障碍是他没有't appear to appreciate the incalculable worth of experience, of coming to 知道/understand through experience. Hence the nitpicking: the arguing at the level of head 理解, being fascinated with the pictures of food 和 arguing that 您'我把防风草叫做胡萝卜。所以呢?防风草和胡萝卜之类的东西实际上味道如何?"He who tastes, 知道s",就像苏菲派所拥有的一样。

      删除
    10. 嘿,迈克尔。 :-)
      我认为帕特里克(吉莱斯皮)喜欢激烈的辩论。坦率地说,我也很喜欢... :-)但是我们还没有't been able to get a good one going 这里. Maybe next time.
      Cheers, 贝纳多.

      删除
    11. I've now read 您r post on Education, 贝纳多, 和 yes, we'在相同的波长上。它'有趣,但是我在天主教小学和中学的教育却不能满足我的学习兴趣。"interior"调查-尽管重视宗教。我的大学前教育中一个更有帮助的方面是科学。唯物主义者可能没有意识到分析训练可以应用于精神问题。

      I'我并没有暗示说,通过分析,可以得出有关上帝存在或任何其他事物的确凿的证据。但是它可以帮助检查经验(内部)和证据(外部)的合理含义,并有助于提出某种将所有内容联系在一起的解释性框架。可以发现漏洞和不一致的地方,并推迟解决任何不存在的框架'在一起很好。

      I find 您r Idealism framework pretty good: it has a lot of 内部 consistency, 和 plausibly fills in a few holes, at least for the time being. But beyond that, it’有趣的是,其他人似乎正在以与我相似的方式对待事物。但是,我不’认为我们仅限于“external”研究对象,既不能奴役当前的科学范式,也要努力尊重个人经验的重要性。

      内部旅程比什么都重要。它’尽可能做到原则性至为重要,不要害怕拒绝那些不遵守的假设’t stand up. I suppose it involves, for me, the interplay of head 和 心, but the primary driver is 心; head isn’不允许完全推翻室内景观。它’是一个有用的盟友,而不是独裁者,对许多简化主义者而言似乎是这样;但具有讽刺意味的是,让它统治的冲动是内部产生的,这使他们脱离了自身存在的核心。

      I’m not entirely speculating; I had my own spell as a reductionist, 和 a lot of that was to do with my disappointment with, 和 rebellion against, the failure of Catholic indoctrination to fulfil my 室内 drive to understand all of 现实。 I think I detect this also in a lot of reductionists. Their rejection of even such basics as consciousness 和 free will, their insistence that the very essence of their being is but an illusion, may at bottom be a way of evading the pain that comes from acknowledging one doesn’知道真相,并且必须进行内部探索才能知道。它’将外部性至上的本质上的形而上学信念提升为知识状态是如此容易,很大程度上是由于公认的技术成功。

      Of course, some religionists do a similar thing: they elevate a metaphysical belief in sometimes 荒诞 doctrines to the status of 知道n 外部 现实。 In the end, it’s all about the need to 知道, which every one of us experiences. To try to come to 知道 requires a great deal of effort, 和 one isn’保证成功;一个人可能不得不花掉所有一个’s life in the limbo of agnosticism. One of the few things I 知道 for sure is that I 知道 hardly anything for sure. I can understand the temptation to pretend belief is 知道ledge rather than treating it as hypothesis, something that one must be ready at any time to reject or amend. But that, in the end, is the scientific approach to 现实。

      迈克尔·拉金(Michael Larkin)

      删除
    12. 是的,Michael很棒的帖子,(还有Bernardo!)我喜欢这里的总体思路是,我们不要't 'know'精神本身就是什么-我的意思是意识本身。头,尤其是在这个事实的栏杆,并抓住'practical' as a way to defend its tendency towards the concrete (and a nod 这里 to the comments on how the structure of our language at present upholds that). The Heart feels, (not simple emotion) but intuition, 和 Love is primary 这里. In Tibetan traditions, the 心 is considered the seat of mind, not the head. (They also have a strong 'mind 只要'或chittamantra哲学-作为一种文化,他们肯定没有'十分注意'practical'- they didn'甚至都不要使用轮子!)

      我认为,作为一个社会,对我们而言,生存是看到和理解心灵的首要性和坚不可摧性—旅程是目标,而实践者(负责人)与爱(心)一起提高我们的水平。意识,所以我们可以继续发展。一世'会在这里插入致幻剂-对于任何还原主义者来说,它们都是肯定的射击方式,可以使裤子获得非常迅速和令人信服的踢动-而且基本不会神智健全(请参阅约翰·霍普金斯关于魔术蘑菇的研究-完全推荐) 。为什么?在这一点上,我们需要一些额外的火力-哲学力量本身对大多数人来说还是有点抽象,显然,我们'关于这个生态系统的时间已不多了。另外,“心”领导得最好-如果像藏族所说的那样,“心是心”,我们需要进入那里。就哲学而言,这个博客是我发现唯一值得的博客之一。

      So, mediate, take hallucinogens conservatively, 和 read philosophy that leads away from the Reductionistic. Thanks 贝纳多!

      删除