Does rationalist materialism serve a greater purpose than I give it credit for? I put the question to a thinker who's spent his career diagnosing the limits of modern science.
not consciousness as "energy" but psychic energy / Psi as a new kind of energy. Yes I agree with you! That was the idea of Rudolf Steiner: That we needed to develop materialism and even be overtaken by it. Then learn how to use the tools of empiricism to explore the "higher worlds" (How to Know Higher Worlds). Thanks for your response - the first video response to my call out! Agreed on Sam Harris etc.
Just because indigenous people are traditional / indigenous it doesn't mean they aren't curious and evolving, and also they need to survive, which means dealing with the paraphernalia of modernity. Otherwise they just get used by it. For instance, their songs recorded and sold, their traditional crafts copied, etc.
Thanks for the considered reply. I'm looking forward to seeing video responses from other followers. (I'd already been working on a written response to your Taylor Swift posts, but that's still in the works.) And p.s: Rupert Sheldrake is a rock star!
I really enjoyed your video response, Saby. When I listen to a philosopher like Sam Harris or a scientist like Dawkins (and all of my colleagues in the sciences), red flags go off in my heart. They are operating out of core beliefs that I do not share, and so our realities diverge. The more insistent they become about their thinking, the more clearly I see that they are living within comfortable boundaries and unwilling to be open, curious, and allow their thinking and experience of the world to evolve. There can be a doubling down when the ego gets too invested in the outcome. When I hear that Dawkins would not even consider hard evidence, then it's obvious that he lives within an internal calcified world where only carefully curated information is allowed in. This happens consciously and unconsciously I'm sure, and we all do this, so it becomes vitally important to become aware of this propensity and examine our underlying assumptions and core beliefs from a place of humility and curiosity.
Absolutely, and thank you for watching and saying so. I look at hardline materialists as EXACTLY the same as religious fundamentalists. Both operate within closed-circuit reasoning that only holds up within its own parameters, and it takes a leap of faith to buy-in to BOTH.
Scientists have told us for centuries that they only accept what can be proven, but that's a misrepresentation of their founding premise, which is that the universe MUST be supposed to be lifeless. This is NOT the neutral, sober empiricism that so-called "science" sells itself on. It's a starting presumption that dictates the bounds of reality like a straight guardrail around a one-lane road that can only point in one direction.
Very encouraging to hear that you work in science and are feeling constrained by that outlook. I always describe it as the >paradigm< of science we've all been inculcated with. There are other permutations of science that can be less rigid, more open.
What can you tell us about the work you do, and how your outlook clashes with your peers. You're not alone! I personally know scientists who are mor open in their outlook.
I work at an enormous repository for zebrafish - a model organism ideal for research into human diseases. I am mostly focused on the husbandry, aquaculture and distribution of these vertebrates. This is not an environment condusive to “knowing higher worlds” ala Steiner. Fortunately, I work very close to a beautiful river with forested pathways where I take my respite each day. I speak the language of science, and put on the professional facade necessary for survival within the confines of a university that functions as a major corporation despite rhetoric to the contrary. Shabby mouldering art buildings lie directly adjacent to colossal temples encasing and reflecting the modern religion/paradigm of Big Science, which more often than not rewards the continuation of empire overall. A study in contrasts, this juxtaposition. I realize that scientific research yields incredible insights, understanding, advancements and benefits. There is also a rigidity of thinking as you well know, and an absurdly bloated administrative bureaucracy acting as systemic reinforcement of the rules of engagement. I am laughed at for my interest in Celtic folklore and spiritual traditions related to druidism, shamanism, and esoteric occult sciences. But these bring me deep nourishment. Thanks for reading, friend. I am grateful for Daniel P and his community here.
And, I feel nudged to point out, it's not just that those spiritual traditions bring you deep nourishment, but that they >could< interface with science in dynamic, amazing ways. Hopefully we get there, but that would require that we evolve from science fundamentalism's grip on the world. It's a mindset, after all, that launched under the premise that animals feel no pain while being dissected alive 🤦🏻♂️
Have you ready Jeremy Narby's book The Cosmic Serpent. A very open-minded SCIENTIST recommended it to me years ago.
I do think we are trending that way, and I will continue to act as a bridge whenever possible. I have heard of The Cosmic Serpent but have never read it. Thanks for the reminder and recommendation!
Now >this< is an essay waiting to happen right here -- so poetically phrased:
"Shabby mouldering art buildings lie directly adjacent to colossal temples encasing and reflecting the modern religion/paradigm of Big Science, which more often than not rewards the continuation of empire overall. A study in contrasts, this juxtaposition. I realize that scientific research yields incredible insights, understanding, advancements and benefits. There is also a rigidity of thinking as you well know, and an absurdly bloated administrative bureaucracy acting as systemic reinforcement of the rules of engagement. I am laughed at for my interest in Celtic folklore and spiritual traditions related to druidism, shamanism, and esoteric occult sciences. But these bring me deep nourishment."
not consciousness as "energy" but psychic energy / Psi as a new kind of energy. Yes I agree with you! That was the idea of Rudolf Steiner: That we needed to develop materialism and even be overtaken by it. Then learn how to use the tools of empiricism to explore the "higher worlds" (How to Know Higher Worlds). Thanks for your response - the first video response to my call out! Agreed on Sam Harris etc.
Just because indigenous people are traditional / indigenous it doesn't mean they aren't curious and evolving, and also they need to survive, which means dealing with the paraphernalia of modernity. Otherwise they just get used by it. For instance, their songs recorded and sold, their traditional crafts copied, etc.
Thanks for the considered reply. I'm looking forward to seeing video responses from other followers. (I'd already been working on a written response to your Taylor Swift posts, but that's still in the works.) And p.s: Rupert Sheldrake is a rock star!
I really enjoyed your video response, Saby. When I listen to a philosopher like Sam Harris or a scientist like Dawkins (and all of my colleagues in the sciences), red flags go off in my heart. They are operating out of core beliefs that I do not share, and so our realities diverge. The more insistent they become about their thinking, the more clearly I see that they are living within comfortable boundaries and unwilling to be open, curious, and allow their thinking and experience of the world to evolve. There can be a doubling down when the ego gets too invested in the outcome. When I hear that Dawkins would not even consider hard evidence, then it's obvious that he lives within an internal calcified world where only carefully curated information is allowed in. This happens consciously and unconsciously I'm sure, and we all do this, so it becomes vitally important to become aware of this propensity and examine our underlying assumptions and core beliefs from a place of humility and curiosity.
Absolutely, and thank you for watching and saying so. I look at hardline materialists as EXACTLY the same as religious fundamentalists. Both operate within closed-circuit reasoning that only holds up within its own parameters, and it takes a leap of faith to buy-in to BOTH.
Scientists have told us for centuries that they only accept what can be proven, but that's a misrepresentation of their founding premise, which is that the universe MUST be supposed to be lifeless. This is NOT the neutral, sober empiricism that so-called "science" sells itself on. It's a starting presumption that dictates the bounds of reality like a straight guardrail around a one-lane road that can only point in one direction.
Very encouraging to hear that you work in science and are feeling constrained by that outlook. I always describe it as the >paradigm< of science we've all been inculcated with. There are other permutations of science that can be less rigid, more open.
What can you tell us about the work you do, and how your outlook clashes with your peers. You're not alone! I personally know scientists who are mor open in their outlook.
I work at an enormous repository for zebrafish - a model organism ideal for research into human diseases. I am mostly focused on the husbandry, aquaculture and distribution of these vertebrates. This is not an environment condusive to “knowing higher worlds” ala Steiner. Fortunately, I work very close to a beautiful river with forested pathways where I take my respite each day. I speak the language of science, and put on the professional facade necessary for survival within the confines of a university that functions as a major corporation despite rhetoric to the contrary. Shabby mouldering art buildings lie directly adjacent to colossal temples encasing and reflecting the modern religion/paradigm of Big Science, which more often than not rewards the continuation of empire overall. A study in contrasts, this juxtaposition. I realize that scientific research yields incredible insights, understanding, advancements and benefits. There is also a rigidity of thinking as you well know, and an absurdly bloated administrative bureaucracy acting as systemic reinforcement of the rules of engagement. I am laughed at for my interest in Celtic folklore and spiritual traditions related to druidism, shamanism, and esoteric occult sciences. But these bring me deep nourishment. Thanks for reading, friend. I am grateful for Daniel P and his community here.
And, I feel nudged to point out, it's not just that those spiritual traditions bring you deep nourishment, but that they >could< interface with science in dynamic, amazing ways. Hopefully we get there, but that would require that we evolve from science fundamentalism's grip on the world. It's a mindset, after all, that launched under the premise that animals feel no pain while being dissected alive 🤦🏻♂️
Have you ready Jeremy Narby's book The Cosmic Serpent. A very open-minded SCIENTIST recommended it to me years ago.
I do think we are trending that way, and I will continue to act as a bridge whenever possible. I have heard of The Cosmic Serpent but have never read it. Thanks for the reminder and recommendation!
Now >this< is an essay waiting to happen right here -- so poetically phrased:
"Shabby mouldering art buildings lie directly adjacent to colossal temples encasing and reflecting the modern religion/paradigm of Big Science, which more often than not rewards the continuation of empire overall. A study in contrasts, this juxtaposition. I realize that scientific research yields incredible insights, understanding, advancements and benefits. There is also a rigidity of thinking as you well know, and an absurdly bloated administrative bureaucracy acting as systemic reinforcement of the rules of engagement. I am laughed at for my interest in Celtic folklore and spiritual traditions related to druidism, shamanism, and esoteric occult sciences. But these bring me deep nourishment."
Why, thank you!