It is difficult to pay attention to watch thoughts and feelings without judging them. The quote which @unenlightened points to from Krishnamurti is relevant because it is about the difficulty emotions and thoughts, and living with them. Independently of mindfulness, I am aware that I have experienced feelings and thoughts which I have considered as dark and troubling. This may be where mindfulness can be particularly useful because it can enable going beyond the point of identifying them and seeing them as aspects which just flow into consciousness, like the sea. It is hard not to feel judgemental over one's thoughts and it may be important to consider how one acts in response to the thoughts rather than the actual experience of them.

As far as mindfulness being used to deny the socio-political aspects of existence, it could go that way if people are encouraged to go into the flight as opposed to fight mode completely. I guess that what mindfulness may enable is reflective space before action rather than a permanent passivity. If anything, when I read books on mindfulness it does seem that it can seem too idealistic and 'chocolate box' like. Life and inner experience can be messy and even though navigation of the chaos may help in enabling coping it probably should not be too rigid and too dogmatic. In books, which give too many exercises, it can all become a bit too technical as well if followed too much like a textbook. Often, I skip most of the exercises, but it may be that some people gain a lot from doing them.

It is probably true that the watching of thoughts is not exclusive to Buddhism. However, when such practices are done in mindfulness meditation it is has how far one should go in seeking detachment, especially with emotions. Identifying with thoughts and feelings can be problematic in some ways but it can go to other extreme whereby people seek to 'overcome' them,.

This could end up with a kind of robotic or mechanical state of being. It can be associated with the problem of ending up living in the head as opposed to the heart. It is hard to know what is the ideal balance and psychoanalysis can go too far in digging up deep traumatic emotions. It may be useful if people can experience the emotional states and, then, move on to a more detached position. It is not simple though and, perhaps, the art of mindfulness may enable a certain amount of fine tuning of it. But, it may be more of an individual journey than one which can be prescribed and it is likely that individuals will vary in terms of the states of mind which they find bearable or best for living.

The idea of 'cancel culture' is often thought of as where ideas which are seen as unacceptable, as prejudiced, are edited, but it can be the exact opposite where people do not wish to hear views which are different from their own. In thinking about the idea of cancel culture, it may be asked who is being cancelled and on what basis?So, the dislike of 'cancelling' is often seen as problematic for being in line with 'wokism' but it can swing to the other way, whereby people may wish to express all kinds of hostility, including prejudices towards marginalised minorities. What should be acceptable as expressed views and what should be outlawed? Is prejudice or hatred, or objection to such views, to be given expression in 'cancel' culture and how may the differences of opinions be managed fairly?

When I was reading some philosophy as a Catholic teenager I was not aware of the complexity of the relationship it had with religion. The first niggle was when a member of staff at my school said to me that he was worried that if I followed philosophy as a subject that I would end up questioning religious belief. That seemed strange and it was several years after that comment that I realised how the philosophy issues lead to deep questions about religious truth.

For many religious thinkers religion and philosophy were united, but as people have become aware that the assuumptioni of religion, especially Christianity cannot be accepted as evident truths it seems that the two have parted to a large extent, with the philosophy of religion being a branch of philosophy. Of course, there is theology, which is philosophy based, but from it's own reference point of certain 'truths' rather than from a wider angle.

The understanding which I have of mindfulness of thoughts is not about undue introspection. In meditation generally, there is a focus upon breath and even emptying of the mind, which is not that easy. I am not sure that mindfulness meditation differs that much from other meditation, although it probably involves paying attention to the senses. The only actual experience I have of doing mindfulness meditation apart from following instructions in a book, was when I had some counselling from a therapist who showed me some practical ways of this meditation

The tasks which you suggest like gardening and caring for a pet aren't what I would call mindlessness, although the only one of them which I ever do is painting. I would say that painting is a form of mindfulness because it is about active attention, especially in relation to the experience of the senses. My biggest example of mindlessness would be going out and getting drunk. I have done it a few times to cope with stress and it involves blotting things out, especially emotional distress.

The thing which I find puts me off this site and another one I use is that it often seems to be the most inflammatory statements which get a lot of responses. I am not saying it is always that way and some really worthwhile philosophy topics come up and that is why I continue to read and write here. But, I do find that I need to be mindful of my own use of it because if I get too involved in certain threads I find it can feel so negative, especially if I am alone, a bit like watching too much news on the television.

I think that I need a bit of mindfulness to take the edge off things. Definitely it has a role to play and when getting stressed by online forums it may be the kind of situation where it is called for.

Obviously, people on the forum have a right to express opinions, but the thread on 'changing sex' makes me feel so miserable that I am wondering if I wish to stop using the forum until it stops being the one popping up constantly. I wonder what on earth people are projecting onto transgender issues. I find the thread a complete disgrace to the site because I know someone who has ended up in a wheelchair for life after being attacked for being transsexual. The people who are writing on the thread may seem to be saying that they are not transphobic, but behind the surface of so many comments there does seem to be so much hostility.

It is interesting to think about mindfulness as a form of pacification. I had thought about that in relation to religious ideas generally, but not in connection with mindfulness in relation to stress. One thing which one professional told me is that If someone uses relaxation and meditation while in a state of extreme stress it can trigger psychosis. I have never been sure about the truth of this, but have wondered about it.

I was not involved in end of life care but I definitely found that ideas of treatment were affected by some religious beliefs. Also, in conjunction with the thread which is popping up constantly at the moment, on 'changing sex' (and I find it so depressing that I try to ignore it mostly), I found that some staff had particular difficulty coping with gay and transgender issues. That was mainly on the basis of fundamentalist religious beliefs.

I definitely look to all traditions for ideas that work. What I found when I was working in the helping profession in London, up until a year and a half ago, was a split between science and Christianity. Mostly, but not entirely, so many of the nursing staff were evangelical Christians and many of the psychiatrists were science orientated. I worked in one setting where all the staff were evangelical Christians and I found it so difficult as they were inclined to preach to me. Also, I remember being on night shifts, during breaks, with other staff were there reading their Bibles and they seemed so puzzled by all kinds of books, including philosophy, which I was reading.

I looked at the article you linked and I do see what you mean and I am not in favour of being 'happy and clappy'. Some of the kinds of therapies which portray that attitude make me feel unwell. My own approach to mindfulness incorporates dark emotions and thinking.

I am glad to hear that practitioners in your part of the world are looking to Eastern wisdom. I think that it is possible that mindfulness was a craze a few years ago but it has been spoken of so much that a lot of people are fed up with it. It is possible that the word mindfulness was overused as a buzz word.

I do still read about it because I have books in my room. To some extent I find it helpful but not that easy to apply. I find the most useful aspect is in connection with thoughts because it can involve being able to distance them rather than being caught up in the spirals. It seems to allow for reflective space.

Some people who use the term mindfulness seem almost oblivious to the roots of the word and idea. It does seem that this may be related to possible 'embarrassment' of its origins and how it has been underplayed within psychology. This may be about a value system as captured in the words of a Doors song, 'the West is best'. Unfortunately, many people do have an attitude towards philosophy which sees Eastern ideas as tainted with mysticism in opposed to the hard logic of rationality of science.

I don't know why everyone makes such a big issue out of sex chromosomes. The majority of people have not had chromosome tests and would not even know if they had an abnormality. Such abnormalities only come to light if there is some reason to do a test. Just imagine someone realising that their chromosomes were not as they thought late on life. What effect would it have on their identity? I am sure that would be variable to a large extent on many factors.

I have read a few of Castaneda's books. I have come across some suggestions that they are all 'made up'. Even if they are fictitious, they still represent important knowledge and can be a source of inspiration for dream states.

When I spoke of opposites, the idea was about them as principles and was not saying how they play out in life. In particular, I am not meaning that real men and women are opposites but simply that the archetypes of masculinity and femininity are. Also, one way of looking at is captured in the yin and yang symbol which has the black and white sides curled up in a circle. What is most interesting though is the way the complementary opposite is also captured in each half by being expressed in the dot, or small circles in the two halves.

There are many opposites: the yin and yang, good and evil, day and night, male and female, mind and body. They are the extremes and it is hard to know how they exist as metaphysical constructs or as aspects of human perception. In this way, they are part of the area often known as qualia.

It is also about the nature of duality and how people juggle the extremes as opposites. That is because there are points along continuum and the interplay of opposites. One other relevant idea is that of enantiodromia of Heraclitus. That idea was that when the extreme of one opposite was reached there would be a swing to the other pole or opposite.

Psychosis can be an extremely terrifying experience and one of my friends is in psychiatric hospital as a result of a psychotic episode. I have worked in mental health care and found that in many cases psychiatrists are dismissive of philosophy discussion of areas such as hypnopompic dreams.

Do you think Jungian therapy is London oriented. It was not easy to find a Jungian therapist and I was undertaking therapy because it was a requirement to have some kind of therapy because I was doing an art therapy training course. However, Jung's ideas barely got mentioned on the course and even in London his ideas are often marginalised.

The worse experience related to reading about dreams when I was about 16 and first came across Freud's ideas I dreamt that I had a gun and shot my father. It was such an unnerving dream and shows how ideas have subliminal effects on dreaming.

Strangely, I have experienced less of my inner right eye imagery since starting the thread. It reminds me of when I was having Jungian therapy and was wishing to explore dreams. When I was in the therapy it seemed as if my subconscious was protesting against being scrutinised by a therapist. The relationship between the inner world and the outer one of daily life is so complex.

I haven't read Monroe in any depth but I may do at some point. I definitely don't think that dreams are meaningless and think that it is a great shame that they are often viewed in that way. I have some recurring dreams and some of them are extremely unnerving. It does seem likely that trauma has a role in this, especially as this is recognised within psychoanalysis. One strange thing which I notice in my own closed eye imagery is that I often see images of myself which change into other people or forms and I wonder what this is about. The world of dream imagery is puzzling.

We probably all have to be careful of not falling into the role of 'charlatan' and I don't wish to become one by starting this thread. So, for others who may read this thread, I will say that I am no 'expert' and raise it for general philosophy consideration.

I think that I read some writing by Robert Monroe in relation to 'out of body' experiences. As I see it, the nature of out of body experiences is interesting, but it is questionable how much can be taken at face value? In other words, it may appear that one has got out of the physical body, but whether that has happened in an objective sense, is another question entirely.

One thing which I am sure of though is that waking reality has a profound effect on the nature of dreaming. At one point, I did keep a dream diary and I found that it had a clear effect on my dream life. I would like to do that again, but it is hard to write dreams down before forgetting them. Even if dreams are mainly related to subjective aspects of experience and consciousness, it may be that they are an important resource and source. I would like to use dreams and lucid dreaming as a source for art and inspiration, but it takes a lot of effort.

Your points of clarification are extremely important because blurring of all the aspects may make the topic more confusing. Even though I think that my own experience of seeing imagery is related to an organic eye problem, it may be that the reason why I developed this may go beyond the physical to aspects of 'spiritual' development.

Definitely, the topic goes into the realms of religious experience and mental health conditions. I would not wish to underplay either of these, and I said in my previous post, it is a 'sensitive' topic. I guess that I would hope that both the medical and religious perspectives are not marginalised or given too much exaggeration. I am hoping that this discussion gives rise to some useful discussion and I put it into the lounge a while after writing the thread to make it a 'quieter' topic. If the thread does not seem to be working in terms of giving some balanced integrative discussion, I will seek to wind it up. I guess I just see it as an aspect underlying many other philosophy discussions and I certainly hope that starting this thread is not a grave error...

I put this thread into the Lounge because in some ways it is a fairly 'sensitive' area, as if people disclose dream experiences it may be a bit private, rather than simply rigorous arguments. The nature of dreams is so complex and, as you say, it hard to know what a 'proper lucid dream' is. I do remember reading some time ago that flying dreams are meant to signify 'upper states of consciousness.' I think that the closest I come to having actual flying dreams is some borderline sleep experiences in which I am floating around my room. However, these have not been particularly pleasant experiences.

Jung was probably correct in indicating that in the interpretation of dreams the individual meanings of the dreamer need to be taken into account rather than rules of interpretation being applied universally. He also looks at dreams in connection with the understanding of symbolism. It may be that dreams, including lucid ones, are about connecting with a different angle. Huston Smith, in 'Forgotten Truth', speaks of symbolism being about being able to explore different 'levels' or 'dimensions of reality'. Also, Peake refers to 'inner space' as a reality in itself.

It may be that there are two opposing approaches to lucid dreams or 'unusual' dream states. One is that which is extremely dismissive. In addition, many people are inclined to the view that exploration of symbolic levels is pointless. In contrast, some people interpret the symbolic experiences in a concrete way. Even if imagery and other aspects of experiences occur with eyes shut, on the borderline of sleep, if people read too much into them it can be dangerous. That may be the way in which many end up going into the territory of 'psychosis'. I consider myself as fortunate that I discovered Jung's writings during adolescence, because I think that otherwise I may have gone on to develop psychotic illness. It is such a fine line, because I have worked in mental health care and seen people struggling in how they understand and interpret symbolic experiences.

There are various models of understanding the various aspects of lucid dreaming and associated experiences, including the shamanic viewpoint. That is interesting in the way in which it refers to voyages to upper and lower worlds. I find reading literature on shamanism, including the work of Mircea Eliade, very useful. Also, there is a lot of interesting writing within Eastern literature, including the model of the chakra system One other important idea is that of 'kundalini', as the energy force rising from the base of the spine to the centre of the forehead, spoken of by Gopi Krishna. He speaks of all kinds of imbalances which may occur in the awakening of the 'kundalini serpent', and how it can lead to 'madness'.

The whole phenomena of lucid dreaming and 'astral travel or projection' is one which may be fraught with dangers. I can understand why many choose to leave it alone completely. Some find it extremely important though. I fall into the category of those who choose to explore it. The main issue may be about keeping balance and it is not easy. I definitely have experienced times when I have lost that balance. Ideally, it may be best to have some kind of mentor but they are difficult to find, and there are so many charlatans. Careful reading from various viewpoints may be the best, with a basis in philosophy or critical thinking may be the best approach, and some kind of grounding in the physical world.

Yes, it is probably unlikely that time reversal could happen as a real possibility because it would involve the reverse chains of causality. It would sort of mean that the injury of the car crash would have to then happen backwards with the crash being later. However, the book was well written and as far as the memory aspects that is more complex because it involves aspects of knowledge being outside of time, from the perspective of eternity. That would make sense in terms of precognitive experiences because it would be about people being able to perceive beyond 3 dimensional world experience.

One idea of an imaginary possibility which is unlikely but not cannot be ruled out is that of time's arrow reversing. I came across it in ' The Death of Forever: A New Future For Human Consciousness' by Darryl Reanney.The book is a contemplation of time and eternity and he thinks that it cannot be ruled out that time's arrow could reverse and history occur backwards. It was also the theme of Martin Amis novel, 'Time' s Arrow' which is an interesting fictional tale of characters' lives in reverse. It is a bit of a mind boggling idea and I have to admit thinking about Nietzsche's idea of eternal recurrence and how it would work as a fantastic possibility...

At first, when I saw your word agnotology I thought that you had made it up. But, I pressed on the word and saw that exist. So, I have learned something new.

I am wondering if you are thinking of the paranormal, which is often shelved next to philosophy in libraries. Of course, there is parapsychology as a branch within psychology. But, the unknown is often is at the edges in between the disciplines as the unknown variable which is hard to classify and put into a box.

I haven't come across anyone who has said that they feel angry about people believing in life after death, although I am aware that being preached to can lead people to feel angry. Personally, I am not sure whether I believe in life after death or not, as my thinking shifts a lot. Of course, the psychology of believing or not believing in it is variable and I do wonder to what extent the psychology of the belief influences belief in it.

Personally, I like the idea of rebirth because one life and one body seems a bit limiting and some have better circumstances than others. However, I try to not simply convince myself that reincarnation exists on that basis because it would seem like philosophical dishonesty.

It is interesting to compare the approach of the novelist and the scientist making formulas. It is not as if one is more 'real' than the other, although some might regard fiction as mere imagination. The language of story is about a different way of seeing and means of showing and telling through the development of narrative and metaphors.

What I have found on psychology courses is that they focus often on the lower scale of needs. Maslow was saying that the basis for moving on to the higher needs is on the lower ones are fulfilled. However, if you read his writings he is emphasising the importance of peak experiences. When I mentioned this on in a class related to once the tutor seemed puzzled and I think that she probably had not read Maslow's writings at all.

In particular, Roper developed a model of nursing care and activities of living linking it to the basis Maslow's hierarchy. That may have influenced the way many have understood Maslow's hierarchy, although I am sure that the philosophical consideration of his ideas involves a holistic approach in emphasising the full spectrum of human needs.

@Hanover
Without going off topic I am afraid that I do get messages saying, 'Data warning' and that I have used too much data, especially when I have logged into links. Perhaps, Big Brother is watching me and sees my interests as subversive, like the Illuminati 'all seeing eye'!

I am extremely interested that you have read Alice Bailey's book, 'Glamour'. I have read it as well as some other books by her. The argument in her book 'Glamour' is so interesting, especially her observations about politics and the way in which Hitler was influenced by esoteric ideas but got caught up with the lure of glamour.

One other writer who I have read is Benjamin Creme and I managed to get to a lecture by him, his final one before he died. However, some of his ideas are very strange, especially that of the Maitreya being in East London, waiting to emerge to the world. He had been saying this for years as well. It was really after my interest in Creme' s ideas, which were based on the idea of channeling that I came back to reading philosophy as opposed to the direction I had gone into esoteric literature.

I am extremely interested in Western esoteric thinking and wishing to discuss it rather than have to listen to a podcast. Using podcasts uses up most of my mobile data allowance and I don't enjoy podcasts. I am more of a reader. I do read in the esoteric traditions, including theosophy and Hermeticism, alchemy, Rosucucianism and the ancient writers. I also try to keep sceptical and critical in the spirit of philosophical enquiry. One writer who I find very useful for his readable writing on Western esoteric ideas is Gary Lachman, who was also the drummer in the pop band, Blondie.

I am not sure how you wish your thread is develop. A couple of people have put entries in about numbers and this may be important in some ways but I see esotericism as being more about ideas, but how they may go back to writers such as Plotinus. But, I am not sure if you are simply wishing this thread to be about the podcast which you introduced or more of a wider consideration of ideas.

I guess that it partly comes down to what people consider to be weird. Even within this site there are norms and some people are probably considered as the weirdos. Does it matter how one is seen? I am sure that this is variable. The point where being weird seems to matter to me is not when others consider me to be weird, but when that is how I see myself. What does it mean to be weird? It can have extremely negative connotations as being someone as an outsider to be disregarded. Or, it can even be romantic, like being a bohemian. It spans the spectrum between being a misfit or a bohemian.

On my good days I see my interest in philosophy, and related fields, as making me different and as being a bit 'interesting', but on bad days as it being a bit offbeat. Part of the problem may be about images and glamour and how this contributes to identity in relation to esteemed ideals about being worthy as a human being. The underlying problem may be about identity, and how ideas of whether someone is weird or not is ranked according to values. In particular, I am aware that I have met people who were regarded as 'strange' and saw them treated badly while I saw them as being interesting.

Another label is 'eccentric' and I probably see myself as a bit eccentric. I have joked at times about being an eccentric and, if nothing else, it made others laugh, because it may be that it is not too good to take oneself too seriously and keep a sense of humour in coping with personal weirdness, and, maybe, life itself is weird and people miss so much of the incongruities and absurdities of everything.

I guess that what you are talking about is scientific fundamentalism which can be as concrete as religious fundamentalism. It just leaves no scope for further thinking. It may be that the process of evolution is nearer to what happened in the sense that it didn't take place in 7 days and there was no actual Adam and Eve. However, there is a lot which still remains unknown, especially the evolution of culture and language. It also appears that rather than some of the earliest people being 'primitive' some of the ancient people were very advanced, such as the in the civilisation of Egypt and Greece. As far as I am aware there is some evidence of a flood, and, of course, there is a lot not known, such as ice ages.

I don't object in any way to you discussing Aristotle here. His ideas are very important, especially in relation to science.

The resemblance between dreaming and idealism is interesting. It conjures up ideas of solipsim and the idea of 'Maya' and everyday 'reality' being an illusion. It does lead to the questioning of the philosophy of realism, and how ideas of objective 'reality' can be established. I see it as an interesting area of speculation, but I am sure that some people may come up with more 'definitive' answers.