tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post115574020433928324..comments2024-03-28T18:48:41.469-07:00Comments on One Cʘsmos: The Devil's Decalogue: Shackle Number TwoGagdad Bobhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comBlogger36125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155849044063799622006-08-17T14:10:00.000-07:002006-08-17T14:10:00.000-07:00Hmmm, he lost something in the translation from No...Hmmm, he lost something in the translation from Notepad to Blogger.<BR/>;-)Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155848979720703302006-08-17T14:09:00.000-07:002006-08-17T14:09:00.000-07:00^^^^^ ^^^^^| | ##### | | \ / |- -| \...^^^^^ ^^^^^<BR/>| | ##### | |<BR/> \ / |- -| \ /<BR/> | | \ = / | |<BR/> | | |\_/| | |<BR/> | |____| |___| |<BR/> ROAR!!!<BR/> (Troll)Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155841687478840652006-08-17T12:08:00.000-07:002006-08-17T12:08:00.000-07:00By the way, and excellent book that explains the C...By the way, and excellent book that explains the Christian-Platonist synthesis nicely is "The Origins of the Christian Mystical Tradition From Plato to Denys," by <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0198266685/sr=1-2/qid=1155841193/ref=pd_bbs_2/104-3671838-8609517?ie=UTF8&s=books" REL="nofollow">Andrew Louth</A>.<BR/><BR/>Also, I didn't mean to sound snarky. It's just that we've had this little troll problem lately....Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155841366594245062006-08-17T12:02:00.000-07:002006-08-17T12:02:00.000-07:00Well, I myself come at it from an esoteric or herm...Well, I myself come at it from an esoteric or hermetic neo-orthodox Christian Vedantist standpoint, which certainly includes Plato (as he was a major influence on the early Christian fathers) but transcends him. The early Christians, in particular, Origen and Denys the Areopagite, took care of what is missing in Plato.Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155841045140123542006-08-17T11:57:00.000-07:002006-08-17T11:57:00.000-07:00GagdadI did not intend to misquote you, and I'm no...Gagdad<BR/>I did not intend to misquote you, and I'm not trying to troll, just trying to learn a bit. <BR/>Folly to Greeks indeed, but I do think that Plato has something to offer although he is also missing something- I'm just looking for what that is. This blog presents views with which I am unfamiliar, and I thought I'd poke around a bit.Zrinyi's Last Standhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11957894905385783314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155839467435617772006-08-17T11:31:00.000-07:002006-08-17T11:31:00.000-07:00ZLS--You wrote:"With the absolute at the apex, and...ZLS--<BR/><BR/>You wrote:<BR/><BR/>"With the absolute at the apex, and good and evil necessary consequences, does this lead to indifference and inaction?"<BR/><BR/>--Obviously not. Our souls are attracted to the good.<BR/><BR/>"If in the end, both good and evil are functions of the absolute, then is there any reason to be worked up about evil in the world?"<BR/><BR/>You're misquoting me. Evil is not a function of the absolute, it is an absurd consequence of it.<BR/><BR/>"Is there reason to be active against evil outside one's self or is it enough to focus on one's own well being?"<BR/><BR/>--Of course there is reason to be active against evil. You are asking questions, the answers of which cannot <I>not</I> be known unless you are trapped in logical circularity. I'm afraid that Plato--nor any other profane philosopher--can provide the answers you seek. He will simply generate more questions that cannot be answered at the level from which they are arising. "Folly to the Greeks," and all that.Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155839155683222902006-08-17T11:25:00.000-07:002006-08-17T11:25:00.000-07:00Zrinyi's Last Stand said... "So I think he's dead...Zrinyi's Last Stand said... "So I think he's dead serious, and ain't it the most ironical thing being serious when you're thought to be an ironist."<BR/><BR/>You're probably right, this new takes I've been having on Plato has been from me just wanting to slap him, & yell "Hey! I like you! Stop being such a dingbat!"<BR/><BR/>- I'll let Gagdad answer for One Cosmos ;-)Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155838554492991272006-08-17T11:15:00.000-07:002006-08-17T11:15:00.000-07:00re: vanDon't get me wrong, I think this blog is ve...re: van<BR/><BR/>Don't get me wrong, I think this blog is very interesting, I just don't agree with it at its base, probably because I haven't studied what it is based on. The farthest East I go is Zoroastrianism, whereas One Cosmos argues a lot from Indian sources. I still find it thought provoking.<BR/><BR/>I would disagree with your view of Plato, though. I don't think he is being ironic in banishing everyone over the age of ten. His view of society is that almost everyone contributes to the corruption of the youth- the sophists, the businessmen, the soldiers, even the parents. To educate the youths in virtue, these corruptors must be removed, as the young must learn virtue before they can be introduced to vice. So I think he's dead serious, and ain't it the most ironical thing being serious when you're thought to be an ironist.Zrinyi's Last Standhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11957894905385783314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155831073813003292006-08-17T09:11:00.000-07:002006-08-17T09:11:00.000-07:00I've seen ACIM summed up as transcendence without ...I've seen ACIM summed up as transcendence without immanence. But your response was much more witty. <BR/><BR/>I'm glad I came across your blog. Thanks for sharing many of your thoughts to the public, free of charge. This blog is a great resource to all the rational "extreme seekers" out there.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155829206207246032006-08-17T08:40:00.000-07:002006-08-17T08:40:00.000-07:00That the Course in Miracles is an absurdity, a mon...That the Course in Miracles is an absurdity, a monstrosity, and a mistake. By its own definition.Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155828962276013742006-08-17T08:36:00.000-07:002006-08-17T08:36:00.000-07:00Perhaps "the world is simply an absurdity, a monst...Perhaps "the world is simply an absurdity, a monstrosity, a mistake." A Course in Miracles certainly argues very forcefully for this position. How would you respond?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155820338779347502006-08-17T06:12:00.000-07:002006-08-17T06:12:00.000-07:00To Zrinyi's Last Stand -"Is it that easy to know t...To Zrinyi's Last Stand -<BR/>"Is it that easy to know the truth? Then why does doubt so persist?" Easy? Hell no! It ain't easy, but you've got to respect it to discover it, and to do either, you've got to face the fact that it is difficult, but worth it, and CHOOSE to seek it. Doubt, when healthy, is just your mind proding you to look at the situation from all angles. When you think you've got it all covered, a doubt will pop up "did you think of X? Whay will happen if Y?!" and if you are focused on seeking the truth, you will consider those questions, and answer them as honestly as you can, and then dismiss the doubt. Ignore the doubt, and you distance yourself from the (I don't have the time to strip the 'fortune cookie' sound from this) path of Truth (!), you feed feed your doubt, distrust yourself, and warp your mind into a proliferation of doubt.<BR/><BR/>"If Plato was right re: free will, the lack thereof, guilt would not exist." No, it is only with Free Will that guilt can exist, because only with Free Will can you choose to try to avoid reality and the Truth.<BR/><BR/>Yes Choice is so important, and you are correct that from Plato on, as opposed to Aristotle (in essentials) the understanding follows against choice, free will, and freedom and in a direct line to the full mind body split of Descartes, Rouseau, Kant, Marx and the resulting rise of Hitler, Stalin, etc.<BR/><BR/>(Or rather, I think that understanding comes from a too fast reading of Plato. He's always been called the first master of Irony & veiled meanings... and I've begun to think he had old Socrates taunting us to look at the blatantly obvious monstrosities that must follow from the quick answer. I may be biased, because I've always liked 'Socrates' - his questions anyway, I disagree with nearly all of his 'answers'. Take a closer look in the Republic, particularly where he's Q&A'd poor Glaucon into agreeing something like "... and so, to start this perfect city, we'll have to lead everyone out of the city who is over the age of 10, so they don't contaminate the youth, right?' 'Yes' Glaucon concedes, and Socrates says "Right, well then" and off they go. I think he's leaving it up to us to involve ourselves in that dialog, and scream out "Lead them where? Just lead Parents off to abandon their children! Are you serious!!! You'd have to Kill Them ALL! Are you SERIOUS!.<BR/><BR/>Unfortunately, most people - like Pol Pot, don't pick up on the joke, and take it seriously, or rather let Plato's writing remain a monologue, instead of a dialogue.)<BR/><BR/>"Is there reason to be active against evil outside one's self or is it enough to focus on one's own well being?" I tell you what, move to North Korea & let me know what answers you come up with.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155797850473652142006-08-16T23:57:00.000-07:002006-08-16T23:57:00.000-07:00Zrynil - If Plato was right re: free will, the lac...Zrynil - <BR/><BR/>If Plato was right re: free will, the lack thereof, guilt would not exist. <BR/><BR/>The "Imp of the Perverse", as Poe called it, does exist - it's the desire to act against what one innately knows to be moral course of action. There are times when it takes great moral courage to resist - by an act of free will - the Imp This is so obvious it hardly needs stating. Any confusion one might have over this could only be the result of a serious disconnect between thought and Higher Intelligence.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155797257736447712006-08-16T23:47:00.000-07:002006-08-16T23:47:00.000-07:00"If in the end, both good and evil are functions o..."If in the end, both good and evil are functions of the absolute, then is there any reason to be worked up about evil in the world? <BR/><BR/>Is there reason to be active against evil outside one's self or is it enough to focus on one's own well being?" <BR/><BR/><BR/>well...where does it all begin<BR/>(or end)?<BR/><BR/><BR/>and what IS "one's own well-being"?<BR/>...wouldn't it include being free from Evil?<BR/><BR/>just a few more questions for ya,<BR/>Mr Plato.<BR/><BR/>;0pgumshoehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10567181585153569751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155793848682980812006-08-16T22:50:00.000-07:002006-08-16T22:50:00.000-07:00re: Van-Is it that easy to know the truth? Then w...re: Van-<BR/>Is it that easy to know the truth? Then why does doubt so persist?<BR/><BR/>re: will- <BR/>Is choice so important? For most religions, it is central. But for Plato, choice doesn't really exist. If you know, you do what you know because you know it; if you do not know, then you're in trouble. Either way choice is non-existent. I think Plato's argument presents a strong challenge to the concept of free will.<BR/><BR/>re: gagdad bob<BR/>With the absoolute at the apex, and good and evil necessary consequences, does this lead to indifference and inaction? If in the end, both good and evil are functions of the absolute, then is there any reason to be worked up about evil in the world? Is there reason to be active against evil outside one's self or is it enough to focus on one's own well being? <BR/><BR/>I'm all questions and no answers, just like my boss, Plato.Zrinyi's Last Standhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11957894905385783314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155789724215295052006-08-16T21:42:00.000-07:002006-08-16T21:42:00.000-07:00Taking a secular route towards the concept of Evil...Taking a secular route towards the concept of Evil (I'm probably an odd ball in this, but I've found that if I first get a grip on something in the tangible or Horizontal plane, then the Vertical seems to kind of naturally draw my attention on up & deep-wards), I think that the possibility of being wrong is a necessary part, a by-product, of having Free Will - if everything truly was determined, there would be no error, only results.<BR/><BR/>Evil first creeps into the picture with our wish to deny our error, and it intensifies with our desire to pretend to not have made an error. It seems that it is with the attempt to avoid, to deny, guilt, that we first put ourselves into war with reality and Truth.<BR/><BR/>And once that snowball gets to rolling, look out BELOW!!!<BR/><BR/>I've pictured Intuitions as mental connective cables between related thoughts, concepts & facts, which the more you allow yourself to follow them to their connections, the stronger & farther reaching the connections become from one truth to another.<BR/><BR/>The attempt to ignore error and deny guilt, the process of putting yourself at odds with reality, obscures the whole, the Truth, and weakens your connections to the oneTruth (One Cosmos?) and the more fragmented and incapable of even sensing any whole you become. <BR/><BR/>In that situation maybe it's not surprising that you might even become irritated and angry at any suggestion that there is an integrated whole out there from which you've long since separated yourself from. No longer able (or willing) to see it, but still tied to it in half forgotten guilt. Denial (and guilt over it) doesn't change reality, it only binds you mercilessly to your attempt to deny it - just as turning your eyes away from something can't stop you from realizing that it is still there - and the fact that you're turning away emphasizes the fact that it is still there and you aren't courageous enough to even look at it, to admit it and see it.<BR/><BR/>I wonder if the desire to evade truth, to pretend that Truth isn't true, isn't the root of all Evil?Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155787626136095992006-08-16T21:07:00.000-07:002006-08-16T21:07:00.000-07:00bob - Wretchard posted a discussion of Alexander S...bob - <BR/><BR/>Wretchard posted a discussion of <BR/>Alexander Solzhenitsyn's speech at Harvard (1978) (speech link here):<BR/>http://www.columbia.edu/cu/<BR/>augustine/arch/solzhenitsyn/<BR/>harvard1978.html<BR/><BR/>....and Belmont thread here:<BR/><BR/>Wednesday, August 16, 2006<BR/>"Belmont Club:Nor any voice of mourning save the choirs "<BR/>http://fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com/2006/08/nor-any-voice-of-mourning-save-choirs.html<BR/><BR/><BR/>i thought you might find<BR/>both the speech and <BR/>the Belmont conversations valuable.<BR/><BR/>excerpt:<BR/><BR/>"If humanism were right in declaring that man is born to be happy, he would not be born to die. Since his body is doomed to die, his task on earth evidently must be of a more spiritual nature. It cannot unrestrained enjoyment of everyday life. It cannot be the search for the best ways to obtain material goods and then cheerfully get the most out of them. It has to be the fulfillment of a permanent, earnest duty so that one's life journey may become an experience of moral growth, so that one may leave life a better human being than one started it."gumshoehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10567181585153569751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155785539587188732006-08-16T20:32:00.000-07:002006-08-16T20:32:00.000-07:00Dicentra - >>If an individual loses it suddenly, a...Dicentra - <BR/><BR/>>>If an individual loses it suddenly, after a lifetime of having it, s/he will probably see it, but in the context of a society in a slow death-spiral, I don't think it's possible.<<<BR/><BR/>I get your point but I think most people must have some spiritual intuition going for them or civilized order wouldn't currently exist at all. I really think people would know it if God were really "dead", ie., if all innate intuition came to an end.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155778934602073332006-08-16T18:42:00.000-07:002006-08-16T18:42:00.000-07:00Dicentra, I like your style.Mmmm hmmm. Preach, si...Dicentra, I like your style.<BR/><BR/>Mmmm hmmm. Preach, sista'!Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155778049251414482006-08-16T18:27:00.000-07:002006-08-16T18:27:00.000-07:00Of course, it could be that people have to lose th...<I>Of course, it could be that people have to lose their divine intuition completely in order to really acknowledge its existence and to fully appreciate it for what it is.</I><BR/><BR/>If an individual loses it suddenly, after a lifetime of having it, s/he will probably see it, but in the context of a society in a slow death-spiral, I don't think it's possible.<BR/><BR/>Many people who don't have spiritual insight don't know that there's anything missing. They have their material needs met, they have their entertainment and distractions.<BR/><BR/>Much has already been lost from our society in the last 40 years, but how many people on the left can articulate what it is? On the contrary, they think we've lost nothing to "progress." The valuable stuff we've lost is something they never valued to begin with.<BR/><BR/>For example, you can tell today's youth that promiscuity will impair their ability to form healthy sexual relationships, but because there is precious little modeling of healthy sexual relationships in our ideological circulatory system (the media, the schools, etc.), they don't know what in Sam Hill we're talking about. They settle for the lesser relationships and call it good, because no one has anything different.<BR/><BR/>It's as if our society were gradually losing its sight, and losing its memory of sight. So if after awhile we <I>all</I> go blind, who's to know that something's missing?<BR/><BR/>God destroys societies as soon as it becomes the lesser of two evils: when what we're doing to ourselves is so bad that we're better off dead, that's when the fire will rain down.dicentra63https://www.blogger.com/profile/18265008441951516140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155776670836689202006-08-16T18:04:00.000-07:002006-08-16T18:04:00.000-07:00gumnshoe--That's a very good question, and I'll tr...gumnshoe--<BR/><BR/>That's a very good question, and I'll try to address it in the future.<BR/><BR/>The "shadow" is basically a Jungian concept, of which I am not one. I would simply use the terms "splitting"and "projection."Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155776380877731872006-08-16T17:59:00.000-07:002006-08-16T17:59:00.000-07:00maxedoutmama--You hit on a critical point, in that...maxedoutmama--<BR/><BR/>You hit on a critical point, in that leftism is an entirely abstract, utopian, dissociated fantasy, whereas Christianity and Judaism are very much rooted in material reality. For that matter, so too is Sri Aurobindo's yoga. All are "embodied" metaphysics which take incarnation very seriously and regard the cosmos as neither ideal nor material, but ultimately "logoistic."Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155775908163710222006-08-16T17:51:00.000-07:002006-08-16T17:51:00.000-07:00apoligies in advance for the OT...bob - i wandered...apoligies in advance for the OT...<BR/><BR/>bob - <BR/><BR/>i wandered over to Ken Wilber's blog,and aside from the messiah-complex,self-infatuation,multi-level marketing schemes,and the neologisms...<BR/>he did have a topic i'd like to see you disccus in a seperate thread,if possible:<BR/><BR/>the Shadow.<BR/><BR/>you've mentioned on many occassions the problems of the Pali's and the Arab(and Persian) world with the Jews and the exsistence of Israel.<BR/><BR/>Dr. Sanity has also spilled<BR/>mucho pixel-ink on the topic.<BR/><BR/>i'd forgotten to bookmark Wilber's<BR/>three part "Shadow Series" discussion(with some linked .pdfs),<BR/>and in doing a google to re-access it, i came across a Wilber critic who pointed out the problem of "*projection* in the other direction":<BR/><BR/>ie we project our GOOD qualites [what Wilber's critic referred to as "our Light"]onto others:<BR/>...idols,heroes,gurus,<BR/>presidents,pundits,etc.<BR/><BR/>it struck me as a valuable,<BR/>non-psychological,non-obsessed<BR/>insight...along the lines of<BR/>"resist ye not Evil,but do Good..."<BR/><BR/>i would be interested to hear your comments on both "Shadow work",to use Wilber's term, and the observtation that "Shadow-Hunting" might not be the main game.<BR/><BR/>-gumshoegumshoehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10567181585153569751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155773918282461322006-08-16T17:18:00.001-07:002006-08-16T17:18:00.001-07:00Grant - but the materialist of today is engaged in...Grant - but the materialist of today is engaged in a denial of some part of material reality, always. <BR/><BR/>There really isn't a dichotomy between dealing fully with the material world and recognizing that there is a transcendant reality not contained by the material world - <BR/>BUT THAT IS NOT THE PURSUIT OF MATERIALISTS! They don't seek to deal with material things, but some subset of them, and that subset is always selected by the materialist in question.<BR/><BR/>Thus, for instance, you will encounter them roaring in disapproval at "visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of those that hate me". It is, they cry, wicked to worship such an evil God who would punish the innocent. But this statement is simple truth. Ask any doctor who has treated congenital syphilis. Ask any psychiatrist. Ask anyone who has dealt with an adult survivor of childhood abuse or neglect. Because the world is material, the consequences of material acts are transmitted through generations. <BR/><BR/>What the "materialist" wants is to take the responsibility for what he or she does out of creation. The materialist cannot succeed in that, and so the materialist ends up inhabiting a self-created world founded in a denial of reality and fiercely reproaching those who want to deal with material reality. <BR/><BR/>Judaism is a deeply materialistic religion, and so is Catholicism. Both enshrine the day-to-day duties and stress the duty of the individual to recognize, repent and atone for that individual's errors of deed. <BR/><BR/>The materialist of today is NOT a materialist, but a wishful thinker, who angrily wishes to impose his or her own wishes upon even the mental and cultural life of others.MaxedOutMamahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08011469804162511617noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1155773755157545252006-08-16T17:15:00.000-07:002006-08-16T17:15:00.000-07:00Not all of us, Bob. Pockets there, pockets here. A...Not all of us, Bob. Pockets there, pockets here. And speaking of "here", that's where you will BE. Sorry.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com