This reminds me of the 'global transformation of consciousness' you've claimed is your hope in an earlier shoot which tastes like one of those indigestible grand narratives....
Yes there are lower levels of pre linguist consciousness present in individuals (the. plemora/atomic level, uroboric and animilia...) but to suggest that a collective identity is the goal is to invite a horror, language allows for fragmentation, that fragmentation is our freedom by which we escape the unity of the cosmos
Though Feeling like we are all one seems to equally be a hoax. no one loves everyone. we hate are differences. we maximize our minimal differences. and saying everything is interconnected is still separation. nor do peopel(usually hippie girls) really actually help anyone by saying things like this. they don't care about my well being. this infinite love is only a symbolic gesture(fake), as likely are psychdelic experiences that promote this feeling an separation as illusion
@brokennarcissist I'm mostlly just ranting about hippie girls. they tend to date the dumbest guys that contribute nothing to anything, except they say 'I love everyon' occassionally...and then hippie girls like them...eventhough the solution to the world's problems is not going to come from everyone loving each other, I don't think....and I think the fact that girls have a preference for guys that are lame in general seems to hold back progress in the world
Individualism results from the thinking that "thinks" it is the person. This thinking begins in childhood. It constructs a "personality", a false self, that slowly takes over the life of the child. By adulthood the person has become a separate "identity" and learns to take his/her place in a world full of separate identities. It is possible to return to the true self, but it can not be done through thinking. Since thinking created the problem, it must be done through non-thinking.
@livenowdoing one should not try to become one with the unconscious.the tribal practices are sacred and dangerous.I think it is Jung who said it
"By adulthood the person has become a separate "identity" and learns to take his/her place in a world full of separate identities"well do you have any other option?and how would a non-person be?
It's endlessly fascinating that those who peddle this sort of death doctrine invariably do it in such syrupy, flat tones. It can almost be shown mathematically: an idea's viciousness is directly proportional to the flatness with which it is pitched. Particuarly ironic since in another video the Professor praised Eric Hoffer, who would surely advise us to run like hell from this siren song.
Surrender my individualism to WHOM, Professor? On what basis?
I suspect modern individualism is a cultural artifact rather than being inherent to human nature. It was taken to an extreme with Western Civilization & in particular capitalism, but it seems to have it's origins with the Axial Age. Julian Jaynes proposed the theory that earliest literature such as from the Greeks doesn't show signs of individualism as we know it. Modern individualism is based on the idea of an objective world of objects, but early humans experienced the world animistically.
@Professoranton I've noticed that the objective world of objects is particularly appealing to conservatives. Many conservatives use capitalism as a metaphor for all of life. They see life as a meritocracy where everything has to be earned. They see the fundamental fact of life is ownership where all the world can be owned and where people even own themselves and can sell themselves to the highest bidder. According to this view, anything that doesn't have monetary value has no 'objective' value.
@Professoranton I've been in a number of arguments with conservatives who believe individualism is the basis of all reality. Their ultimate argument is perceptual. They see a world of separate individual objects including humans, but they don't seem to be able to see their own cultural biases. Many conservatives seem less aware of factors that are subjective and intersubjective which has always bewildered me. I'll bring up social science research, but to them such research seems irrelevant.
@Professoranton As I was saying, I don't think individualism is inherent to human nature, but I do think there are psychological predispositions that make one more likely to accept the cultural biases of individualism. For example, Ernest Hartmann has done research on boundary types. Thick boundary types tend to experience the world in terms of separation: between themselves and others, between waking and sleeping, between past and present, etc. They have minds that tend to narrowly focus.
@Professoranton I noticed a commenter below mentioned Ayn Rand which reminded me of some posts I wrote. Conservatives tend to mistrust the subjective and the intersubjective, the abstract & the theoretical. They tend to trust what is practical, concrete & tangible. They look for fundamental truths & rules.
@Professoranton I was just watching two videos I thought might interest you:
/watch?v=l7AWnfFRc7g
/watch?v=QMrYSSA_LXM
The first video is about Jeremy Rifkin's ideas on empathy and civilization. The second video mentions UFOs in terms of perception which remnded me of Jung's book on UFOs where he discusses them in terms of individuation. Your video inspired me to post all of this together:
shut up and get back in line no talking no thinking no you you are a monolithic homogeneous douche start acting like it,but that's what you are doing carry on then
your a stupid socialist moron colectivism has killed mllons of people conserveatively ) Individualism on the other hand has killed no one power to individualism ,death to all collectivist
Are words merely things in an environment or are people within the environments that the words make possible? For example: What is a calendar? Are the days of the week in an environment or are we in the environment of the week?
would you not agree that, in order to have a valid reason to believe, that something exists; there should be some evidence for that thing. This evidence may have to be transcribed in to a form that is recognizable and meaningful; and this form tends to be a visual one.
i suppose, that this is comparable to using a metaphor or an analogy, to describe something that otherwise is outside of our basic framework for understanding reality.
wonderful reflections. i especially like how you talk about dreamless sleep and the periodic achievement of awake-ness.. got me all reflective. wonderful! =)
One never has the direct experience of dreamless sleep; at best one wakes to find one "as having been" undifferentiated. What does it meant to wake up and know this?
Are you suggesting that science is able to deal with sound as sound, or does it turn sound into something else in order to theorize it? Science is the step-child of literacy, and it does, I would suggests, have a visual bias.
Science has conceptual models, of course. However, the central aim of science is to attain (partially) objective knowledge about nature, which means going beyond direct experience and the senses.
Scientists don't turn sound into something else. They create over-simplifications (theories and conceptual models) in order to better understand some aspect of reality. Phenomenologists and radical empiricists seem to ignore (or not understand) the fact that science would be impossible without the help of non-observational predicates, e.g., mass. Observation is crucial, of course, but ultimately scientific research is supposed supply knowledge that our senses can't.
I think your criticism of science is way off. Science does not have a visual bias. Every scientific hypothesis and theory makes use of non-observational predicates. Moreover, the overall pattern of inference in science is not inductive, but rather hypothetico-deductive. Einstein's relativized law of falling bodies is a case where theory is far more important than empirical data.
Excellent my only gripe is that seeing as the universe is flawed in that experiencing is more apropriate right I mean if your to compare a human with five senses to a universe that may have say just one ultimate sense or more than many senses. Wait I see where I'm going forgive me I'm new 2 all this we are like the universe right so we can share any values and senses it's only the brain matter that differs right. Shucks this is deep Corey. Good fun though very practical application of academia.
Take a look at Lacan's early work on the mirror phase. He addresses this phenomenon head-on. An infant aspires to the integrated totality (Gestalt) seen before him/her, indeed discovers/constructs its unity/individuality in the ideal image of the other ((m)other).
People who can't live in the moment need either a future, a home or a consequence. When you can live in the moment with others then the future is not a worry.
I'm only into this 43 seconds, but you're conflating immortality of the soul (which yes is a philosophical problem) with the resurrection of the body, which in my religion is a belief that does NOT relate to immortality of the soul. Our religion believes that's not really in the Bible. However, we also notice that truth involves all of us in a connected manner. So please don't lump me in with these people. I believe that this issue is what's going to get people the second death during the (MORE)
thousand year reign of Christ. As we learn morality from that King, people are not going to want to give up their illusion of independence. This is where those "torture" scriptures come in, the metaphors that Christendom with their immortality of the soul doc claims to be eternal torment (they are wrong). I'm with you on this, but don't like the conflation that you make. Cheers.
It seems to me that you've gotten the relationship between ourselves and the background and others and the background reversed.
When we look at others we see them fused with this large system of ins and outs that surrounds them. However, when we look at ourselves introspectively, we see ourselves as removed from the system, i.e. we're an individual thing surviving freely and differently from this assortment of matter which we seem to be attached to.
I am still trying to grasp the concept so I will have to save comments for later.
If I may, please leave 2 or 3 seconds of silence at the end of your videos as youtube has a nasty habit of cutting the ends of your videos. Whatever you record and save as a file, expect 1 or 2 seconds at the end to be cut off. Maybe you want to put a picture at the end for a couple seconds.
you were wrong about the "visual" understanding. Our senses actually turn information into THOUGHTS; and that includes the eye itself!
DaSkinnyApe 10 months ago
I'm not sure I agree, do you think that 'self' and 'other' are not valid? Because it seems like individualism is inherent in that.
twistedbydsign99 11 months ago
This reminds me of the 'global transformation of consciousness' you've claimed is your hope in an earlier shoot which tastes like one of those indigestible grand narratives....
Yes there are lower levels of pre linguist consciousness present in individuals (the. plemora/atomic level, uroboric and animilia...) but to suggest that a collective identity is the goal is to invite a horror, language allows for fragmentation, that fragmentation is our freedom by which we escape the unity of the cosmos
brokennarcissist 11 months ago
Though Feeling like we are all one seems to equally be a hoax. no one loves everyone. we hate are differences. we maximize our minimal differences. and saying everything is interconnected is still separation. nor do peopel(usually hippie girls) really actually help anyone by saying things like this. they don't care about my well being. this infinite love is only a symbolic gesture(fake), as likely are psychdelic experiences that promote this feeling an separation as illusion
CammieSpectrum 11 months ago
@CammieSpectrum Actually some of us adore difference and hate consensus, it's sort of the point of post 1940 art and philosophy.
brokennarcissist 11 months ago
@brokennarcissist I'm mostlly just ranting about hippie girls. they tend to date the dumbest guys that contribute nothing to anything, except they say 'I love everyon' occassionally...and then hippie girls like them...eventhough the solution to the world's problems is not going to come from everyone loving each other, I don't think....and I think the fact that girls have a preference for guys that are lame in general seems to hold back progress in the world
CammieSpectrum 11 months ago
@CammieSpectrum Hippies pretend they don't have a dark side then get messed up by their glaring blindspot.
brokennarcissist 11 months ago
Individualism results from the thinking that "thinks" it is the person. This thinking begins in childhood. It constructs a "personality", a false self, that slowly takes over the life of the child. By adulthood the person has become a separate "identity" and learns to take his/her place in a world full of separate identities. It is possible to return to the true self, but it can not be done through thinking. Since thinking created the problem, it must be done through non-thinking.
livenowdoing 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@livenowdoing one should not try to become one with the unconscious.the tribal practices are sacred and dangerous.I think it is Jung who said it
"By adulthood the person has become a separate "identity" and learns to take his/her place in a world full of separate identities"well do you have any other option?and how would a non-person be?
Torcika 11 months ago
It's endlessly fascinating that those who peddle this sort of death doctrine invariably do it in such syrupy, flat tones. It can almost be shown mathematically: an idea's viciousness is directly proportional to the flatness with which it is pitched. Particuarly ironic since in another video the Professor praised Eric Hoffer, who would surely advise us to run like hell from this siren song.
Surrender my individualism to WHOM, Professor? On what basis?
I'll hang up and wait for my answer.
ProudBourgeoisie 1 year ago
Professoranton: YOU WILL BE ASSIMILATED INTO THE SOCIALIST COLLECTIVE. RESISTANCE IS FUTILE.
tiakpark 1 year ago
I suspect modern individualism is a cultural artifact rather than being inherent to human nature. It was taken to an extreme with Western Civilization & in particular capitalism, but it seems to have it's origins with the Axial Age. Julian Jaynes proposed the theory that earliest literature such as from the Greeks doesn't show signs of individualism as we know it. Modern individualism is based on the idea of an objective world of objects, but early humans experienced the world animistically.
MarmaladeINFP 1 year ago 4
@MarmaladeINFP Thanks. Great link to Jaynes! Good call
Professoranton 1 year ago
@Professoranton I've noticed that the objective world of objects is particularly appealing to conservatives. Many conservatives use capitalism as a metaphor for all of life. They see life as a meritocracy where everything has to be earned. They see the fundamental fact of life is ownership where all the world can be owned and where people even own themselves and can sell themselves to the highest bidder. According to this view, anything that doesn't have monetary value has no 'objective' value.
MarmaladeINFP 1 year ago
@Professoranton I've been in a number of arguments with conservatives who believe individualism is the basis of all reality. Their ultimate argument is perceptual. They see a world of separate individual objects including humans, but they don't seem to be able to see their own cultural biases. Many conservatives seem less aware of factors that are subjective and intersubjective which has always bewildered me. I'll bring up social science research, but to them such research seems irrelevant.
MarmaladeINFP 1 year ago
@Professoranton As I was saying, I don't think individualism is inherent to human nature, but I do think there are psychological predispositions that make one more likely to accept the cultural biases of individualism. For example, Ernest Hartmann has done research on boundary types. Thick boundary types tend to experience the world in terms of separation: between themselves and others, between waking and sleeping, between past and present, etc. They have minds that tend to narrowly focus.
MarmaladeINFP 1 year ago
@Professoranton I noticed a commenter below mentioned Ayn Rand which reminded me of some posts I wrote. Conservatives tend to mistrust the subjective and the intersubjective, the abstract & the theoretical. They tend to trust what is practical, concrete & tangible. They look for fundamental truths & rules.
benjamindavidsteele.wordpress. com/2010/06/11/conservative-mistrust-ideological-certainty/
benjamindavidsteele.wordpress. com/2010/06/14/conservative-mistrust-ideological-certainty-part-2/
MarmaladeINFP 1 year ago
@Professoranton I was just watching two videos I thought might interest you:
/watch?v=l7AWnfFRc7g
/watch?v=QMrYSSA_LXM
The first video is about Jeremy Rifkin's ideas on empathy and civilization. The second video mentions UFOs in terms of perception which remnded me of Jung's book on UFOs where he discusses them in terms of individuation. Your video inspired me to post all of this together:
benjamindavidsteele.wordpress. com/2010/11/06/against-individualism/
MarmaladeINFP 1 year ago
Comment removed
cstlljoey7 1 year ago
Comment removed
cstlljoey7 1 year ago
shut up and get back in line no talking no thinking no you you are a monolithic homogeneous douche start acting like it,but that's what you are doing carry on then
cstlljoey7 1 year ago
your a stupid socialist moron colectivism has killed mllons of people conserveatively ) Individualism on the other hand has killed no one power to individualism ,death to all collectivist
TheRivetthead 1 year ago
@TheRivetthead let us individualists get together collectively and kill all collectivists!
Ilikenuman 1 year ago
im a proud in individualist
TheRivetthead 1 year ago
shut up individualism is the only way individualism is the best way ever
TheRivetthead 1 year ago
Psychedelic colors have never seemed so beautiful to me. Thanks whoever you are..
mkklmann 1 year ago
2:02 what?
MrCropper 2 years ago
I recommend you read Walter Ong.
Are words merely things in an environment or are people within the environments that the words make possible? For example: What is a calendar? Are the days of the week in an environment or are we in the environment of the week?
Professoranton 2 years ago
You can probably do a great Kermit the frog voice...Shit.
magicshopper 2 years ago
would you not agree that, in order to have a valid reason to believe, that something exists; there should be some evidence for that thing. This evidence may have to be transcribed in to a form that is recognizable and meaningful; and this form tends to be a visual one.
i suppose, that this is comparable to using a metaphor or an analogy, to describe something that otherwise is outside of our basic framework for understanding reality.
bobbyatopk 2 years ago
i'm having trouble understanding what the message is here. are you criticizing what you percieve as individualism in epistemology?
fede2 2 years ago
What you describe as "I" is only a specialized
part of the total you, it is also the reinforced
Western world conception that gives rise to
the individual separation you are describing.
Is it in your way?
How does it block it ??
That is very difficult to answer if the you is only a small part of your totality but is considered the only important part.
Science only got moving when it started to
look at the invisible visually part of the world.
tyrbolo 2 years ago
wonderful reflections. i especially like how you talk about dreamless sleep and the periodic achievement of awake-ness.. got me all reflective. wonderful! =)
katerinabonvora 2 years ago
at 5:10 : "experience myself as having been undifferentiated" - who exactly is experiencing
them self in this instance and what experience are you having in dreamless sleep?
busheybushdawg 2 years ago
One never has the direct experience of dreamless sleep; at best one wakes to find one "as having been" undifferentiated. What does it meant to wake up and know this?
Professoranton 2 years ago
I can induce a state that is very similar to deep dreamless sleep. It is incredible... FULLY incredible and empty.
MaBu888 2 years ago
Are you suggesting that science is able to deal with sound as sound, or does it turn sound into something else in order to theorize it? Science is the step-child of literacy, and it does, I would suggests, have a visual bias.
Professoranton 2 years ago
Science has conceptual models, of course. However, the central aim of science is to attain (partially) objective knowledge about nature, which means going beyond direct experience and the senses.
DarwinsGarden 2 years ago
Scientists don't turn sound into something else. They create over-simplifications (theories and conceptual models) in order to better understand some aspect of reality. Phenomenologists and radical empiricists seem to ignore (or not understand) the fact that science would be impossible without the help of non-observational predicates, e.g., mass. Observation is crucial, of course, but ultimately scientific research is supposed supply knowledge that our senses can't.
DarwinsGarden 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
<33 at this comment.
CoffeesIsBack 2 years ago
I think your criticism of science is way off. Science does not have a visual bias. Every scientific hypothesis and theory makes use of non-observational predicates. Moreover, the overall pattern of inference in science is not inductive, but rather hypothetico-deductive. Einstein's relativized law of falling bodies is a case where theory is far more important than empirical data.
DarwinsGarden 2 years ago
Excellent my only gripe is that seeing as the universe is flawed in that experiencing is more apropriate right I mean if your to compare a human with five senses to a universe that may have say just one ultimate sense or more than many senses. Wait I see where I'm going forgive me I'm new 2 all this we are like the universe right so we can share any values and senses it's only the brain matter that differs right. Shucks this is deep Corey. Good fun though very practical application of academia.
robbwindow 2 years ago
Take a look at Lacan's early work on the mirror phase. He addresses this phenomenon head-on. An infant aspires to the integrated totality (Gestalt) seen before him/her, indeed discovers/constructs its unity/individuality in the ideal image of the other ((m)other).
notonewhit 2 years ago
I can go into deep meditative state that is very much like deep sleep, but fully conscious. :)
I can therefore relate to this video more than I would at times admit in some social situations LOLOLOL.
Got nondual in the end, eh? I like what you did there. I SEEE what you did there! Good damn video.
1PostPoMoMaN1 2 years ago
I'd call it spatialization bias, much like Jean Gebser put it.
1PostPoMoMaN1 2 years ago
People who can't live in the moment need either a future, a home or a consequence. When you can live in the moment with others then the future is not a worry.
PhoenixArmor 2 years ago
great video.
the extreme individualism we see here in the states has always bothered me.
its an illness.
alovelytime 2 years ago
where's the evidence for all these statements?... j/k
TheObnubilators 2 years ago
I liked this talk, thanks for sharing.
Mathfails 2 years ago
I'm only into this 43 seconds, but you're conflating immortality of the soul (which yes is a philosophical problem) with the resurrection of the body, which in my religion is a belief that does NOT relate to immortality of the soul. Our religion believes that's not really in the Bible. However, we also notice that truth involves all of us in a connected manner. So please don't lump me in with these people. I believe that this issue is what's going to get people the second death during the (MORE)
jedimasterbooboo 2 years ago
thousand year reign of Christ. As we learn morality from that King, people are not going to want to give up their illusion of independence. This is where those "torture" scriptures come in, the metaphors that Christendom with their immortality of the soul doc claims to be eternal torment (they are wrong). I'm with you on this, but don't like the conflation that you make. Cheers.
jedimasterbooboo 2 years ago
It seems to me that you've gotten the relationship between ourselves and the background and others and the background reversed.
When we look at others we see them fused with this large system of ins and outs that surrounds them. However, when we look at ourselves introspectively, we see ourselves as removed from the system, i.e. we're an individual thing surviving freely and differently from this assortment of matter which we seem to be attached to.
JasperAvi 2 years ago 2
Thank you for the video.
I am still trying to grasp the concept so I will have to save comments for later.
If I may, please leave 2 or 3 seconds of silence at the end of your videos as youtube has a nasty habit of cutting the ends of your videos. Whatever you record and save as a file, expect 1 or 2 seconds at the end to be cut off. Maybe you want to put a picture at the end for a couple seconds.
Again, thank you for the video, +5 stars
fomenter666 2 years ago
Maybe you can do a video on Ayn Rand. Her philosophy has been gaining popularity recently.
BrianTheMusicMan 2 years ago
There is something beautiful about sleeping people - while we (dreamlessly) sleep there is a sense of deep truce, there is an armistice.
cloudmonkeys 2 years ago