I will try but it is quite difficult to read books on a phone. I struggle enough to read the long pieces on my phone. I know that you can enlarge them but then you can only see part of a sentence at once but I may give it a go tomorrow

That is a good question but obviously depends on individual psychology. Personally I sometimes feel able to enjoy my own company but do spend my time reading books by others and CDs which are made by others, so I am not really an island. I do have a friend who can go for weeks with no conversation apart from getting served in shops and cafes. He really enjoyed lockdown and perhaps lockdown.
Perhaps the lockdown is the best way to judge this if you live alone. I lost my job and had to move in lockdown and had to move into new accommodation. I am currently living with a group of boys who deliver food on motorcycles and English is not their first language. They were puzzled by me moving in with my piles of books. I have barely seen friends for 6 months and have only seen my mum. It is probably why I end up tinkering around on this site.
So, my general conclusion would be that most of the people who are replying to threads are looking for some happiness through human contact even if it is relating to philosophy. I once had a tutor who said that ideas do not exist if we keep them in our heads without other people.

Yes, you are probably right. Most of us are quite fragile and I was responding to the thread on what others think of us at the beginning of the week.
While I am on this thread I will say that I have been unable to download the book on Modern Paradigms because I can only download Amazon books on my Kindle. I tried on this phone but couldn't get the app I needed without upgrading my phone. So I am afraid I won't be able to read and give feedback unless libraries open for me to use a computer. Sorry about this.

To Enrique.
While I agree with Possibility that you seem to use verbose language I will try to download and read your book.
While I do feel that I am not popular on this website, dismissed as not being a proper philosopher I am actually open minded and prepared to listen and read as many views as possible.
I will try to find a cafe to log on to wifi with my Kindle. I will try to give constructive feedback.

To Noble Dust
I think that in one way you may be right in a sense that philosophy may describe structure of reality rather than participating in it. However, there is a danger of philosophy becoming too detached from the world.
On this site subjects which are not 'pure' philosophy are being discussed, such as Donald Trump and clothing, so I don't see why the esoteric philosophies should not be incorporated but obviously if people don't want this to happen it doesn't have to.
I can go back to my corner of Watkins bookstore and leave the big questions to those consider themselves to be real philosophers for the time being. I can just reply to their threads, on what the majority choose to discuss, on their terms.

The point I took as hostility was that it seemed that you objected to my post and lack of definite answers. But perhaps you are not that certain yourself by calling yourself unenlightened.
I read the writers you mentioned, especially Krishnamurti and his position is interesting as so much expectation was placed on him.
Another of my favourite writers is Colin Wilson. I am interested in peak experiences and mysticism. I do still read philosophy as a discipline thinking on the edge is important.

I am glad that you have some humour because it is lacking on this site currently.

Philosophers spend their lives embarking upon truth. While I have no absolute answers I know that there are other dimensions of experience and love the mystery of questing about the unknown and have found certain truths.
But I am not a preacher or ego-centred, so wish to initiate dialogue, but so far the responses to my discussion have been very hostile, apart from one which was a bit more optimistic.
I am disappointed that in the responsea I have received so far it seems that the people reading this site today, but my main aim was to open up areas of debate for any like minded people who have an interest in the esoteric traditions of philosophy.

I would say that philosophy needs to get back to using words like artists rather than just get caught up in the glamour of long words. The real philosophers who got published were creative explorers looking at life and death questions. Even Kant wrote a paper on the esoteric ideas of Emmanuel Swedenborg, which felt so clearly into the esoteric tradition which I am referring to.

My own reason for initiating this discussion was an open ended quest for truth, which goes back to Socrates. So much current philosophy, including some discussion on this site seems caught up in
clever play of words, like the Sophists and I am concerned with the the question of big questions about reality, and don't want to get caught up in any dogmas of religion or cults.

I am replying to Amen and Possibility, my phone doesn't seem to give me arrows to ensure that you will get an email.

Anyway, I did finally finish reading Kant's Critique of Pure Reason today, although it was quite a difficult read. My thoughts on it were that I think Kant's view is important and the current world is too focused on the empirical. The last academic course I did, 5 years ago, was entirely evidence-based. The tutor insisted that every point made in the essay for the course had to be backed up an evidence based study or a published paper and I found this to be going too far. Even though the course was related to nursing it still gave no scope for critical reasoning ability.

Nevertheless, I think that Jung's emphasis on the integration of the four faculties of reason, sensations, feelings and intuition are important to for getting a most thorough knowledge of reality. This does not dismiss the role of logic and in Jung's televised interview he made the famous remark about his understanding of God, that he did not simply believe in God, but 'I know.'
What both Jung and Kant both recognise is that important of the inner world as a source of knowledge. The inner world is often dismissed in current psychology as I found out on psychology modules on various courses I have done, apart from one on art psychotherapy. But on that one it seemed that feeling was stressed above all others. When I was given clinical supervision by an art therapist he told me that I was 'too much in my own head' because I was often philosophical. Of course I don't wish to be out of balance and I have undertaken a period of personal Jungian therapy and I hope this has offered me some integration.

But the point I am trying to make is that I think Kant does offer a worthy viewpoint although his perspective is limited to reason alone. It is worth reading his writing as a means for understanding the importance of reason which is often ignored in present day thinking, and by looking at his perspective we can gain recognition of the faculty of reason. In the time of Jung's writing the sensory, bodily world was the shadow and perhaps now in the 21st century transcendent logic has become the new shadow.

I don't know if this little essay offers anything worthwhile to the thread but as it seems to have stopped anyway I thought I might as well say something. I was a bit disturbed that I seemed to have shut down the thread because even though I may have appeared critical it was not my intention to interrupt and sabotage the discussion but just open things up for new ways of exploration. We don't want Kant to be buried as a long lost prophet, but to be alive as the authority figure he should be in current philosophy.

To Dimensional 72:
What you are saying is essentially true and is exactly the underlying philosophy of cognitive behavioral therapy. It is our perception of others' opinions that affect us rather than the opinions themselves. It is magical thinking if we believe that their opinions affect us directly.
However, the individual quest to be free of caring about the opinions is not easy. In the first place we do not always know the opinions completely because they are sometimes expressed directly but are sometimes barely expressed at all or in bits and pieces. So, sometimes the opinions we are so affected by are not even true. I know people who are elated by what they believe others think of them and know that the beliefs in the so- called wonderful opinions are in fact delusional. The most obvious example would be those who believe another is in love with them when that is not true. But I would not suggest trying to shatter the happiness of fantasies about others good opinions unless you really need to do so, unless of course one is a trained therapist and knows exactly what one is doing and why.
But while I agree that other people people 's opinion do not affect us directly I still maintain that it is extremely difficult to liberate ourselves entirely from any regard for these opinions, or our perceived notions of these opinions, because we are social creatures fundamentally. The human ego is fragile, affected from experience from birth, and to overcome this sensitivity is difficult. People who lack any sensitivity to others might be more damaged. The people on the extreme end of the autistic scale, who often have little awareness of others' mental processes can end up having little regard for others feelings and treat others with disregard. So, our sensitivity should not be eroded too much.

Yes, I agree with Possibity that it is problematic when there is too much emphasis on physical reality and that we need to be able to be given space to process five dimensional reality.
I have felt that for about 5 to 10 years that my relationships have become strained due to this sensitivity. In a work context I explain I once mentioned that I felt that some of my own work difficulties was because I was aware of five dimensional reality and I think she thought that I was psychotic.In actually I don't even think that I am more dyspraxic than autistic but I do find that I need private time to reflect and if I am put in social situations where this is difficult I get really stressed.
I believe that the Covid_19 crisis is not simply a battle against death as the government tries to make it sound but about a redefinition of boundaries in social connections. It is difficult for all of us because so much guilt is around, so much guilt about fear of the virus and giving it to others.
Personally, I think my biggest stumbling block in struggling with other people's opinions is when I am made to feel guilty. I have an elderly mother and she and friends of hers often say things which imply that I should always be thinking of her first and we have no other living relatives. This affects me terribly but obviously all families and social groups have problems.
I think it is more difficult if people are able to name or conceptualize their emotional sensitive areas. I can identify mine but struggle if I cannot get the private space to process it all.
The aspect of social life that I miss most with the current pandemic is libraries because they have been my sacred sanctuaries ever since adolescence. I have plenty of books but they are they are such wonderful places for thinking, with just the right amount of human contact.
But I do think that for many people social distancing is so difficult because they are not used to spending time by themselves and standing back from physical and social reality. Social interaction has positive and negative aspects which impact on us and, yes, it is so hard at times to remain balanced by being pulled unconsciously into the sway of detrimental views and judgements of others.

I wish that I did not care about what others think of me but I am afraid that I still do. I am not sure if I care whether they like me but I do value others opinions. My self esteem and self worth is affected by narcissistic.
Life in post lockdown has become more solitary for many including myself. I am comfortable being alone for long periods, which I know that many people find hard to tolerate but significant others opinions of me do intrude into my consciousness.
I have experienced a fair amount of rejection and criticism and such experiences often feature in my dreams and if I have such dreams I feel out of sorts on the following day.
One friend told me recently that I care too much what others think of me and I said that I care about the opinions of certain people but not everybody. I am not sure if it would even be desirable not to care about what anyone thinks because it would like being in an autistic bubble.
To some extent it is probably ego consciousness which is focusing on others' opinions. I am far less bothered about what others think of me than my earlier years. During my teenage years I was extremely self conscious about my appearance and about others reaction to things I said and did. I have come along way from that but still feel sensitive. I am unsure if my sensitivity is a curse or blessing.
To be free of any sensitivity would be to deny the social aspects of being human but on the other hand too much sensitivity to others reactions can inhibit and inhibit daily life and creative freedom. My own ideal would be to tune this sensitivity to positivity, as a spur to inspire creativity and artistic freedom.

To all,
I think a new thread is needed because the last couple of days of discussion have been going into tangents and I originally sought this thread because I am interested in Jung.

I admit that my responses have been poor, which have been partly because I am feeling really low in mood. Maybe I would be better on a psychological forum but I am actually interested in the area in between psychology and philosophy.

I don't simply wish to discuss my own issues but the search to understand truth and reality. The whole part about aesthetics and gender just led me into my own angst while in fact I want to get into philosophy debate to get away from personal problems. But at the moment I am not feeling up to starting a thread, but did feel that the discussion going was rather fuzzy anyway and I was simply trying to stimulate new areas of debate.

Actually,I think that my response was more in relation to the mad fool. I am really just challeng rigid definitions of gender on the basis of appearances.
Perhaps I am involved in the wrong thread but it began with Jung and what I would say is that the internal world of aesthetics is at the heart of it. Thinking about Kant, his own exploration of a priority truths was based on truth discovered in the mind, even it is based on transcendental concepts or archetypes.
My own contribution would be that we may all have to confront the shadow of the unknown, or the uncanny as Freud called it. Perhaps this could even be an aesthetics of ugliness and embracing the freakish, but this does not mean abandoning eros or traditional aesthetics but simply expanding it. Of course, you may ask why is this important at all and for some conventional aesthetics, including those regarding gender are satisfactory but I believe that for many conventional aesthetics are limiting and a source of unhappiness.

Hello, I have been reading Kant's theory but got sidetracked by reading Bertrand Russell's History of Western Philosophy.
Following this, I logged onto this website and felt a bit disturbed by Amen' s comments about the size issue between men and women. I may have read it too superficially because I find reading on my phone difficult.
I was a bit upset because I am am a small person, whether viewed as male or female. Having taken testosterone I have achieved masculinisation development which I take as a marker of masculinisation, more important than height, or even weight.

I am also influenced by postmodernism and the biological markers of masculinity, especially the phallus, even though I am aware that ideas of maleness and femininty transcend the body. However, the genital aspect of the body cannot be ignored and it is only on the basis that my genitals are more male after taking testosterone that I feel more at ease with myself.
I hope that this does not cause offence because i is not intended to do so. It is simply a matter which underlies gender and its expression.

I will say that I am interested in the arts but have fairly unconventional aesthetic tastes. I like alternative music, including punk and metal which I got into while doing an art therapy evening class. However, I am interested in exploring experiences peak states of consciousness as well as living with and integrating the shadow. I am interested in Eastern philosophy and Buddhist views on love and compassion.
Anyway I started reading Kant's Critique of Pure Reason after texting Possibility, but it may take a while because I am reading several other books including one on Hegel's philosophy of mind. One sample I read and felt excited by was a book on trans humanism and medical enhancement. It included work by Dr Ruth Chadwick who was the original tutor who introduced me to Kant.
But the main philosophy question which has perplexed me since my college life is whether there is life after death. I think there may but am not at all certain.
Anyway, I will continue reading your dialogue but I need to read a bit more of Kant as I have only read the book on morals and that was at the beginning of my life quest .But I have planned to come back to Kant because I know that his theory of knowledge influenced Jung.

Thanks for replying to me, Possibilty. I will read Kant again because I have a couple of books by him downloaded on my kindle which I was planning to read at some point.
My own background is mainly in mental health but previous to that I studied Social Ethics at S. Martin's College in Lancaster and chose to do this as part of my quest for truth and direction in life.
I went on to do a dissertation on Jung's Answer to Job.
I read a lot all the time in search for truth and have an interest in the new physics as well as esoteric philosophy, but I will give Kant another read because I think other people's prejudices against him biased me and I believe in looking at everything from many angles.

I have been drinking too much and sometimes get into a foggy state and even get lost. I am worried about this.The reason I drink in the first place is because it aids my reading and writing.
I do believe that alcohol aids me into altered states of consciousness and can lead me into heaven or hell. I believe that I have been to both. It is my own shamanic dreaming. But I wish that psychedelic substance were more widely available so that I could have a better alternative to alcohol.
I also wish that I knew someone else who used alcohol as a shamanic journeying aid rather than just as a socialising tool.

Surely Kant was wrong to limit judgements to reason alone. He was aloof from the sensory world and against sex. At age 19 I was impressed by his thought, especially the categorical imperative. But at this stage I was repressing my shadow and I think Kant had no awareness of his own shadow.
An aesthetics which is detached from experience is too remote to be of use to humans. Kant is important but in the 21st century we are moving into multidimensional reality and reason alone cannot be limited by the blindness of intellectualisation as the only means of judgement. Such perceptions would be like climbing into a black hole.

I am sorry my comments keep breaking off but writing on a mobile phone is difficult.
I still experience dysphoria but feel happier and I don't wish to be stereotypically male. I don't want to be aggressive and wish to remain sensitive but I do think testosterone has changed my behaviour to some extent. It has made me less interested in other people but I seek to remain compassionate to others.
My main goal is to feel happier with my own body and this quest has not been easy, but relating this to Jung's ideas, he suggested that individuation is not easy.

Singer's interpretation of Jung's ideas on gender is interesting but she does focus on the integration on a psychologically level mainly
My own quest has involved taking testosterone and I still currently still look ambiguous. On a subconscious level I think maybe this reflects my own alignment with the archetypal hermaphrodite, which spans the spectrum of trans and intersex issues.

I was introduced to June Singers book, 'Androgyny by a tutor on my Social Ethics course and it helped me think about my own gender issues in relation to the archetypal masculine and feminine and the wide spectrum of gender identities, including the archetypal hermaphrodite.

I am a transman and non binary in gender identity and have found Jung very important on my quest. This is because I have found his ideas on opposites essential in my life, as well as his emphasis on symbolism. However, Jung's wrote in a very different era in which LBGTQIA ideas were not mainstream at all.