Please explain."Approach life" from within or without? (i.e. immanently or transcendently)
— 180 Proof
I think these converge at the limit. — csalisbury
The terms I use are so often used and misused that I find most people misunderstand them at their core. I have actually thought a lot about the concepts behind these terms before settling on the terms I’m currently using, and I feel they are each still open to change. god must be atheist mentioned ‘thinking in concepts’, which I think aptly describes my approach, but I also work in communication, so it’s important for me not to just use a word that sort of fits or simply sounds good.
Integrity, patience and self-awareness, for instance, all relate to awareness before we even begin to connect or collaborate with the world. They point to our attitude towards information. In the past I’ve used ‘self-control’ instead of self-awareness (and I’m not convinced this is the right term, either), but I’ve come to understand that it isn’t so much about ‘control’ as it is about learning how we accept and integrate information before acting, and how that affects the way we respond to the world. In a way, it’s about gathering enough information so that our predictions about future interactions are more accurate. I have noticed, for instance, that hormonal cycles change my awareness of quantitative vs qualitative information - not a great deal, but enough that either my spatial or emotional intuition is affected, for instance. Knowing this enables me to factor this uncertainty into how I then interact with the world at certain times.
Integrity is being honest with ourselves - particularly with how our past impacts on our present, and our openness to information from the world based on the sum total of our past experiences. This is basically an understanding of cause and effect in relation to who I am up to this point. With self-awareness, it doesn’t have to stay this way, but we need to interact more accurately with our past in order to start somewhere.
Which brings me to patience - which is recognising that any change we want to happen requires time, effort and attention in the present that we have to find from somewhere. The brain makes predictions about the body’s energy requirements and where our attention needs to be focused every moment of our lives, to the point that we can pretty much go through the motions without conscious effort. If we’re going to adjust this in any way, there will be internal resistance from systems that are used to working autonomously. No change happens overnight, and experiences of pain, humility, loss and lack will feature in any adjustment worth the effort. We need to be aware of how much of this is tolerable at any one time, and therefore how long it’s going to be before things improve. So it’s about an accurate interaction with our present situation. — Possibility
Please explain. — 180 Proof
The New Existentialism" is worth a read. It's short and to the point. — ZzzoneiroCosm
I'm an epicurean (scientific) materialist, though once upon a youth ago I found gnosticism quite intriguing (my 'existentialist' phase no doubt), so transcendent notions strike me as ad hoc woo-of-the-gaps evasions (i.e. Camus's "nostalgias"). One is real which presupposes belonging to the real world so trying "to get back to the real world" makes no sense to me.I've been attracted to gnosticism for a while. I guess the DNA of gnosticism is that the real world is removed, or you're removed from it. That sounds transcendent: the goal is to get back to the real world. But I also think that you can be fallen, within the world. — csalisbury
I can relate. Aesthetics (philosophical) and making artworks (play) - as you suggest in the 'toy soldiers in the woods' vignette - reminds us 'how to pay attention' - how to attend - to negligent and impermanent things that are too close to see or looking thru/past foreground bright & shiny trivias that obfuscate the deeper dark surrounding background. "The goal", it seems, is not "to get back in the world" but rather, IMO, to engage and challenge the shallow figures & events in the foreground (like artists do) which the real world - with a bedazzling myriad of 'veils', camouflages or mirages - conceals its absymal, chaotic depths from its real creatures, like us, who're too fragile & fleeting to digest (i.e. totalize, encompass). Thus, the absurd persists, even if only tenuously in momentary flashes, or strobic lucidity (Camus again) ...The world that you're fallen from is already there, and you're already in it- The fall was just forgetting how to pay attention. It's like being too drunk at a concert.
I'm an epicurean (scientific) materialist, though once upon a youth ago I found gnosticism quite intriguing (my 'existentialist' phase no doubt), so transcendent notions strike me as ad hoc woo-of-the-gaps evasions (i.e. Camus's "nostalgias"). One is real which presupposes belonging to the real world so trying "to get back to the real world" makes no sense to me. — 180 Proof
"The goal", it seems, is not "to get back in the world" but rather, IMO, to engage and challenge the shallow figures & events in the foreground (like artists do) which the real world - with like veils, camouflages or mirages - conceals its absymal, chaotic depths from its real creatures who're too fragile & fleeting like us to digest (i.e. totalize, encompass). Thus, the absurd persists, even if only tenuously in momentary flashes, or strobic lucidity (Camus again) ... — 180 Proof
of New Existentialism — csalisbury
which carefully charts the progress of the former thing as a reflection on the author's importance. — csalisbury
New Existentialism — csalisbury
I remember the first time I heard, from a dearly valued friend I had feelings for, how much she loathed philosophy. Its irrelevance, seeming uselessness, how she felt more practically oriented, more of the order of learning directly from concrete experiences and relationships. I was completely taken back by her statements, haven't heard it expressed so forcefully and bluntly.Still, the whole time you have to live. And, if you're hooked on ideas, the world is degraded in favor of those ideas (or good literary recaps) and you get more and more zoned-out. That's me in my 20s anyway. — csalisbury
What I really want is techniques for how to live, and techniques for how to approach life as it is. That's hard - some inner instinct bucks and shies from that - but what else to do? It feels like the only thing to do is shave off everything that isn't touching on that, and find what works. But the addiction is still there, trying to make things as abstract as possible. — csalisbury
Personal humility is a starting point - I agree with this. Self-awareness, patience and integrity together enable us to recognise the potential distance between where we are and where we aim to be. There is not only humility in this, but also an awareness of lack, perhaps even pain. When we experience all three, we are ready to take the first step.
"Life as it is" what?
That's hard - some inner instinct bucks and shies from that - but what else to do?
When all else fails ... question your questions?
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.