Comments

  • Why Do We Dream? What is the Significance of Dreams for Understanding 'Mind' and Consciousness?

    It could be problematic if people see dreams as 'real' as objective as opposed to psychological way. This may be particularly the case with borderline sleep experiences. Having had some disturbing experiences and images on the borderline of sleep, I can see that the danger is of inflating dreams beyond the scope of human imagination. This is where the possiblity of delusion and 'psychosis' creep in.

    One way in which I see the nature of the imaginary world of dreams is a way of going through certain experiential adventures in an imaginary way rather than having to wait for the actual experiences in real life. It is about virtual possibilities. Some dreams may involve pleasure,and it may be saddening to wake up from these ones. In contrast, certain horrorific dreams may involve the processing of deep fears, especially nightmares.
  • Why Do We Dream? What is the Significance of Dreams for Understanding 'Mind' and Consciousness?
    Some people do regard dreams as psychological 'garbage', whereas I am inclined to the view that they represent so much more. In saying that I am not going along with ideas of literal dream interpretation, as in books which try to give specific meanings to dream symbols.

    I do follow the psychoanalytic model but not just that of Freud or Jung, and their views were different from each other, but the general view that dreams are of such importance in the nature of mental processing of experience.

    At one point, I kept a dream diary for about 6 months, which was not easy because dreams need to be written down as soon as possible, before they are forgotten. What I discovered in the process of paying attention to dreams by recording them was that my dream life took on form and patterns, which was useful for self awareness. However, dreams and their recall may be beyond conscious will. In particular, at one point, I did have Jungian analysis, and, what I experienced was that I stopped dreaming for a while, or being able to remember my dreams. It was as though my own subconscious was rebelling against an attempt at analysis and I began having dramas in waking life and my waking experience became the focus.

    Of course, the idea of the conscious, unconscious and subconscious are open to philosophical speculation because there may be a continuum, including the depths of self consciousness and awareness in sleep. This may be where the layers of processing occur. One aspect which I am aware of recurring dreams. I do have some recurring dreams, and see these as being of significance for understanding aspects of my life which leave a lot of unresolved issues.
  • Why Do We Dream? What is the Significance of Dreams for Understanding 'Mind' and Consciousness?

    I wonder to what extent the experience of dreams is related to a different kind of consciousnes and memory. It may be different from the conventional forms of understanding and causality, or linear logic and the arrow of time in terms of explanation. Here, I am speaking of a way of intuitive understanding, which may so different from the basics of commonsense logic and explanation. In particular, it may involve intuitive understanding.
  • Why Do We Dream? What is the Significance of Dreams for Understanding 'Mind' and Consciousness?

    I am not wishing to dismiss the value of empirical understanding and evidence, in favour of a form of skepticism. It is possible to get carried away with dream 'reality' to the point where it is seen as more 'real' than waking consciousness. Some Eastern philosophy gets to that point, where the everyday perspective is seen as an illusion or 'maya'. That may be going too far, and, if anything sleep and dreaming may be more about not getting too caught up with the splits between hardcore and rigid thought to the point where the nature and role of imagination are cast aside.

    For example, if I meet someone I know in my dreams it is extremely different from a meeting in daily life. However, it may still be important for understanding the relationship on a less conscious or subliminal level. I would go as far ad to say that such 'meeting of minds' may almost as real as what happens in waking life because the nature of connection and relationships involves so much much which is subliminal and beyond the scope of verbal communication and understanding.
  • Why Do We Dream? What is the Significance of Dreams for Understanding 'Mind' and Consciousness?

    Thank you for your detailed reply. You speak of the inner world and outer world, which is the main dichotomy between waking and sleep/dream consciousness.. So much of waking consciousness may be regarded by many as the basis of what is 'real'. I am not disregarding such a division but when it is seen ad an absolute division it may become more of a burden than a source for helpful reflection.

    I know that my dreams are not 'real' in an objective sense and have an inner logic or meaning. It may be involve psychological.meaning and Interpretation primarily, but this may be as important as some other objective criteria for understanding 'truth' and meaning.
  • Why Do We Dream? What is the Significance of Dreams for Understanding 'Mind' and Consciousness?
    Reading your response, makes me wonder about the specific division between 'sleep' and 'dreams'. It may be a commonsense one but it is not absolute, especially in relation to hypnagogic dream states and lucid dreaming. I am wondering how dream states come into play and the nature of the periphery of such zones as states of awareness or lack of awareness.
  • Gender is mutable, sex is immutable, we need words that separate these concepts

    Your reply seems a little simplistic and not embracing the dilemmas of transgender individuals. I have worked with people who are transgender in mental healthcare and the nature of labels, what one is biologically and what what one wishes to become. It does involve ideas of the 'body'.

    To a large extent, I see this thread topic as one which is academic and lacking in understanding of issues of variance, both transgender and intersex. Each person comes from an individual perspective of experience. This is important but what I see is the problem is that on the basis of ideas, especially generalised ones, is that generalise and prescriptive ideas are generated as a matter of 'pure' theory, as opposed to looking at individuals and their daily life dilemmas.
  • Gender is mutable, sex is immutable, we need words that separate these concepts
    The division between sex and gender is complex because a person's identity as being male or female involves so much, including reproductive functions and sexual expression. This gives rise to many forms of fundamentalism, including religious ways of thinking. One issue may be to what extent it amounts to theory and how much is about personal identity? The two may overlap, to some extent, but, where there may be 'real' issues is about the nature of bodies and gendering. Part of the issue may be about how life and gendering is formed around ideas of sexuality.

    A person who is transgender may turn so much upside down in thinking of bodies and gender; by wishing to be the opposite of ' what nature intended'. This may be where the fundamentalists step in with the hardcore objections, as if it was as simple as a matter of bodies. Human identity involves such a complex mixture of bodily and social aspects of gender identity. It is such a complex area of psychology and many who identify in the transgender spectrum struggle with the issues of gender identity.

    One complex case is that of Kiera Bell, who, in England, transitioned from female to male in England, as a teenager, and regretted it. Kiera is now transitioning back to female and regretting the effects of hormones and surgery. On the other hand, many are struggling with gender dysphoria and the ways and means of gaining access to achieve hormones and surgery.

    If anything, the times of twentieth first century offer so much scope for achieving bodily transformation. Some may experience psychological difficulties,or side- effects of meditation, such as polycythemia in female to male transsexuals. So much may come down to being able to have the 'desired body' of the chosen gender; and the whole range of psychological discrepancies. If anything, the mind- body issue of transgender people, as well as those of intersex individuals, may raise so much about the whole nature and assumptions of the nature of gender.

    It may raise the question of the binary and, what is involved in binary thinking of gender. How much is about body and mind, the discrepancies between the two and how such conflicts may be put together,?
  • Why Do We Dream? What is the Significance of Dreams for Understanding 'Mind' and Consciousness?
    The nature of dreams may raise the scope of 'mind' and 'consciousness' beyond daily life experiences and understanding. There is a twilight zone, especially in the realm of borderline states of consciousness. Dreams may be seen as fantasy but some unusual states of mind, such as near death experiences may be held to be of greater validity. It is such a speculative area, in relation to the nature of inner experience and what this signifies on a larger scale of objectivity. The subjective experiences of spirits or 'God' may be dismissed or held as as a starting point for so much more philosophically?

    The question of dreams, fantasy and idealism may be important here, especially in connection with opposite perspectives, which may involve a reductionist approach, 'flat' thinking, and even nihilism. It is questionable as to what extent nihilism views nihilism. Is everything in life viewed as 'nothing of significance'? Are dreams to be reduced to psychological experience and what does psychological experience amount to? Are dreams a mere aspect of fabricated illusion or an essential aspect of fantasy, as higher aspirations, goals and values?
  • On ghosts and spirits

    One aspect of the idea of ghosts and spirits would be the idea of disembodied 'minds'. My initial understanding and reading of philosophy incorporated this, especially in the idea of life after death. However, on a gradual progression of thinking, I have come to see this as problematic, especially in relation to ideas of consciousness, including life after death. It would seem to suggest a form of dualism, with some kind of entity of 'self' or 'mind', as an 'immortal' being, which is so questionable.

    Of course, the matter is far from simple, as the 'spark of consciousness' cannot be reduced to matter alone and the question of the primacy of matter or spirit remains at the core of philosophical debate. Consciousness itself may make the issue far more complicated than many thinkers, especially determinists, may acknowledge.
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?
    In the first place, my linking ideas of the esoteric with philosophy is meant to involve critical thinking about it as opposed to complete acceptance. I came to this philosophy site after a complex mixture of esoteric and philosophy reading without having thought about some underlying contradictions. For example, I embraced existentialism, postmodernism and theosophy. Such ideas probably don't fit together well.

    As far as the 'beyond' it may come down to how many dimensions exist. It may be that reality is multidimensional, according to each perceiver's point of view and its shifting nature. This would not be transcendental but imminent, although it is possible that there is cosmic consciousness, which may be more about Maslow's idea of peak experiences, self-actualization and creativity.

    Poetry may be one way of going 'beyond', as well as other forms of art. Both making and viewing aspects of art may have a transformational effect. I am inclined to listen to music in that way, almost meditating to it or using it to enter alternate states of consciousness. I have had moments of synthasesia without taking any hallucinogenics. There is meant to be a physical basis, as opposed to spiritual one, for synthasesia, as a result of the nodules in the brain for the development of the senses, especially sight and sound having a common origin.
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?

    I am not sure that the risk of being seen as an outsider is the biggest risk of following an esoteric philosophy. The risk would be of being mistaken if it involves extreme ideas.

    Changes in lifestyle may accord with following a tradition, but that applies to religion if taken seriously. I remember when I was going to Christian Union when I was a student, all the things which were considered to be wrong morally. In particular, sp much music that I liked was considered as 'wrong' to listen to..

    Generally, there is more tolerance in some groups, with less emphasis on 'sin' as such. Changes in lifestyle may involve abstaining from alcohol, vegetarian or veganism. Of course, there is the point where someone joins a sect or a cult, but that is a bit different, and most esoteric thinkers are more likely to attend meditation groups. Also, most people who take an interest read or blend ideas.

    Of course, there may some dangerous ideas and I am familiar with there being some concern that the ideas of Alestair Crowley being dangerous. Also, there may be dangers of confusion due to dabbling with ideas like fortune telling and astral projection.
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?

    I am inclined to agree @Pantagruelabout the limitations of 'the mundane'. It seems such a 'flat perspective'. Of course, I am not wishing to go into a fantasy world of the 'hidden', and a lot does come down to what is 'true, as well as what works as a philosophy to live by and with.

    I am not sure that there is any absolute objective meaning and it may come down to Victor Frankl's point of finding meaning in daily existence, including suffering. So some of the ideas to which each of us gravitated towards may be about subjective choice. Saying that, I am not wishing to suggest that psychological biases are the main basis for belief. They may contribute to what paths of thinking one goes down, but it does involve reason as well.

    Personally, I wish to pursue ideas from the exoteric and the esoteric because I am not sure that 'truth', logical or psychological can be split into one or other categories. So, I see it as a whole area of exploration in the widest sense of 'the examined life'. My own dipping in and out of so many different perspectives may be a bit like crawling through a maze at times, and I may be my worst enemy here. However, it is also a quest for 'waking up' and looking beyond surfaces. The idea of 'hidden' may be mythical as opposed to an objective 'reality' beyond the visible.
  • To What Extent is 'Anger' an Emotion or Idea and How May it Be Differentiated from 'Hatred'?

    The binary is the essential basis from which mood is assessed. I know whether I feel 'good' or 'bad' as a basis for assessing one's own wellbeing. When people ask me how I am I often say''in between', although I may be just being polite in terms of not wishing to come out and say, 'not that great'.

    Nevertheless, the subtle effects of emotions may be brought out by attention to fine details. Processes of description may affect experience and expression of emotions. For example, the processing of anger, may be done internally by the description of specific thoughts, such as the triggers of it, and the way in which it is attributed. In particular, if one blames oneself or others, the anger may be a different experience as opposed to when the anger is experienced for what it is a non-judgmental approach to it, and prevent 'beating oneself up' for the way life unfolds, including the anger itself.
  • To What Extent is 'Anger' an Emotion or Idea and How May it Be Differentiated from 'Hatred'?

    I didn't mean that it is not possible to work out the actual effects of thought. In particular, the ABC model of affect, behaviour and consequences is relevant. I am aware of the parallels between CBT and Stoicism. What I meant was that the nature of emotions may affect the nature of judgment itself and affinity with particular ideas. It is likely that mood affects perception itself. Personally, I think that I see differently, according to whether I feel sad or happy, such as the intensity of colours. It is probably a two way process of thinking affecting mood and mood affecting thinking. Also, bodily health affects mindset itself.
  • To What Extent is 'Anger' an Emotion or Idea and How May it Be Differentiated from 'Hatred'?

    It is difficult to know to what extent emotions help or hinder in thinking. In some ways, it can end up in a picture of 'bias. Emotions may tinge the way in which ideas are seen.l

    In the extreme, this may involve anger at ideas which may have a destructive role. 9n particular, ideologies, religious or otherwise can be a source of anger. It can lead to so much psychological and social awareness of the construction of systems of ideas.
  • To What Extent is 'Anger' an Emotion or Idea and How May it Be Differentiated from 'Hatred'?
    a
    Absence of emotion is an interesting area. In particular, the philosophy and spectrum of autism, raises this question. However, if does come down to what the absence of emotion signifies. Is it about being overwhelmed by the conflicts of the dichotomy of emotion.

    Also, on a more conceptual basis, what would it mean to go beyond emotions? How much would be a state of emotional or even logical indifference, How do idea of emotional, logical or reasoning aspects of experience differ in understanding aspects of human experiences?
  • To What Extent is 'Anger' an Emotion or Idea and How May it Be Differentiated from 'Hatred'?

    The idea of anger as 'frustration' may be important as it can involve so much experience of being 'put down'. The emotion of anger may involve so much repression and suppression.

    The ideas of the psychoanalytic thinkers, including Freud and Jung may be important here. Freud speaks of the battle between life and death instincts, Eros and Thanatos. Jung speaks of the 'shadow' as a questionable 'inferior' aspects of human nature to be understood. The role of human emotions and how these are understood may be extremely important in this area of thinking, especially in relation to human nature and self-awareness.
  • To What Extent is 'Anger' an Emotion or Idea and How May it Be Differentiated from 'Hatred'?


    What is a philosophical 'bitch'? Is it the absolute of opposition of thought? Also, to what extent do ideas which challenge us, represent 'enemy" thinking, or the biggest challenge? Oppositions of ideas are a stressful, but it is questionable where this lead for personal and interpersonal aspects of thinking.
  • To What Extent is 'Anger' an Emotion or Idea and How May it Be Differentiated from 'Hatred'?

    Your point here about anger and philosophy discussions, including philosophy forums, is especially important. It may show aspects of investment and attachments to ideas. It is hard to know how possible it is to go beyond this. What would a philosophy apart from human emotions entail?

    The angry philosophers may be criticised but what would if mean to stand aside from the emotional aspects of philosophy. Would the absence of emotion and anger lead to indifference, and a consequent philosophy of ideas of indifference?
  • To What Extent is 'Anger' an Emotion or Idea and How May it Be Differentiated from 'Hatred'?


    I will look into Sartre's idea of anger and hatred as it seems particularly relevant. It may be that some people on the forum have looked into this writing and area of thinking.

    Nevertheless, on a most basic level of thinking the relationship between ideas and emotions may be significant. Going beyond ethical ideas, even the basics of philosophy can stimulate anger. There may be angry theists and atheists . I am not trying to deflect the issue here, because such ideas can be a basis of war of ideas and literal war.
  • To What Extent is 'Anger' an Emotion or Idea and How May it Be Differentiated from 'Hatred'?

    Concepts of pathology may come down both ideas of 'normality' and 'disease'. Going back to ideas of physiology, some such thinking involves the basis of life death, or what Freud regarded as Eros and Thanatos, or the life and death instincts.

    The dichotomy here may involve objective aspects of 'illness, including physiological aspects. In spite the this grey area of thinking, the relationship between the physical and mental are intricate. Ideas of pathology and w6hat constitutes 'nomality' may have significance as to.how emotions and relationship to philosophical.ideas and ideals are considered and framed.

    In this respect, the movement of antipsychiatry is open to dispute. Thinker from RD Laiing and Thomas Sszas question ideas of pathology. They may have seen some shortcomings, although some of this may be so theoretical as to miss the essentials of emotions, as a starting point for understanding the nature of human values, including its significance for thinking about ethical norms and values.
  • To What Extent is 'Anger' an Emotion or Idea and How May it Be Differentiated from 'Hatred'?

    I am not wishing to get into unhelpful kits about the nature of 'pathology' but where it seems to me to be most complex is in the construction of ideas of 'mental illness'. I , wonder to what extent it comes down to the organic and defense mechanisms. .

    This may come down to philosophical issues underlying psychiatry. How much is physiological, even on a neuropsychological basis? Sometimes, psychology and philosophy are seen as separate and it is likely that the focus is different.


    In the real life conundrums of life, including the nature of anger, the differences in the emotions and ideas of anger may be profound

    . Part of this may come down to the nature of egoistic concerns and wider ones. This may so much about human needs, including physiological aspects. Nevertheless, the philosophy of how human emotions and underlying values may be significant. Psychology doesn't exist in a vacuum and the physiological and conceptual basis of what matters may be an important area for philosophical consideration
  • Asexual Love

    The question of 'asexual love, involves the question of what is sexuality and how does it come into play in human relationships. What is the difference between friendship and romance? How much comes down to the nature of human needs, connections and the role of the erotic as an aspect of sexuality?
  • To What Extent is 'Anger' an Emotion or Idea and How May it Be Differentiated from 'Hatred'?

    Your full consideration of the spectrum of human emotion is very important. It is such an important area of the phenomenology of emotions. Of course, where human emotions come from is also an important question. Emotions, and the instinctual aspects of human life may go back to the instinctual aspects of physiology. This is about lower and higher needs, as suggested by Maslow's in his hierarchy of needs. This an aspect of psychology, but concepts of lower and higher aspects of human nature are unconnected with ethical values, especially in the way psychological.ideaz are seen and evaluated philosophically.
  • To What Extent is 'Anger' an Emotion or Idea and How May it Be Differentiated from 'Hatred'?

    The concept of hatred as opposed to love is a complex area of human life, ranging from varying perspectives of human nature and motivation and values. Even the concept of love itself is open to question as to what it may entail. Also, how love and hatred as opposites stand as psychological or philosophical ideas stand I'd open to question. Are the ideas a reflection of the complexity of emotions or the emotions a conflict of the nature of ethical values ideals?
  • To What Extent is 'Anger' an Emotion or Idea and How May it Be Differentiated from 'Hatred'?

    You may be right about common sense of ideas about what constitutes anger. However, pathology in itself is a construct. Here, I am not trying to suggest a necessary going 'beyond good and evil', but more a way in which ideas taken to an extreme can mask so much. For example, in war the idea of an enemy, may evoke so much about ideas of justice, or injustice. A person who Is different, or has different beliefs may be perceived as an oppositional force.

    This may be where values come into play, and insistence on one's own set may even lead to a self-righteous sense of anger, to the extent of an argument for the 'common good'. This makes ideas of anger, justice and injustice a controversial area of social ethics.
  • To What Extent is 'Anger' an Emotion or Idea and How May it Be Differentiated from 'Hatred'?

    I wonder to what extent anger is a response or something more. You may be correct to point to the significances of a response, especially in terms of human action.

    However, it does involve the difference between the emotion and the ideas connected with it. In particular, anger can be understood in terms of a physiological response, or in connection with wider aspects of ideals, moral or political. There can be aspects of anger as a negative or positive emotion or as an idea for thinking about how life should be lived, in terms of values.
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?

    I find that life and ideas have become rather shallow and 'trivialised' in the information age, with clicks of smart phone, Wikipedia and links. It seems to be the opposite of esotericism, with so much information readily available, with often little reference to the specifics of ideas and usefulness of the particular significance for understanding. Of course, I am wary of over generalisations, especially as many people on this forum do read widely, and engage on a deeper level as opposed to some social media sites.

    It may be about being able to dip into ideas in the information age, but still being able to pursue ideas in a deeper way, and this may be the potential artistry. It may not be easy though, and I have to admit that I still enjoy time alone with a paper book as a companion, as a way of 'tapping into' the creative mindset of the writer.
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?

    The question of the esoteric and default issues of meaning is a good question. Meaning, or lack of meaning are arbitrary and objective, and esoteric ideas are variable in this sense. The notion of a way may depend on some objective basis of meaning amidst this. The subjective and objective meanings of 'pathways' of the psyche and spirituality are so variable, within different frameworks. Ego death itself is questionable here as well, as to what extent it about going beyond conventional ideas of 'self' and wider frames of reference, as seen in the various transpersonal perspectives.
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?

    Derrida and Foucault are important as means of perspectives of critical thinking. If anything, what I see as being the worst possibility here, is where ideas are reduced, even beyond the spectrum of the exoteric and esoteric.


    The outer life and its ideas are important, but when it comes down to outer, or conventional. norms of meaning and understanding, so much may become lost. Those who exist on the peripheries of social may be marginalised. The question of the esoteric, may involve so much about the contexts and framing of meaning.
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?

    The concept of the 'esoteric ' has indeed covered so much and been used and disbursed in so many ways. Its use probably goes back to Hermeticism and Plato. Here, Plato, spoke of 'forgotten knowledge', as if the ancients may have been aware in a way which was becoming ' lost'.

    So, the idea of the esoteric and esoterica is a question for 'inner' vs 'outer', as well as aspects of archaic and future possibilities. I even wonder about the psychosocial aspects. Those who are marginalised, as well as struggling, may have more interest in the esoteric, as opposed to those thriving in mainstream societies. So, it may even involve socio- political aspects of philosophy.

    Here, I am not wishing to reduce meaning to the socio- political aspects of life experiences. However, ideas come into play in such a complex way, involving the entire psychosocial and political dimensions of thinking.

    The art of philosophy is important but it involves all of these facets of life. The 'esoteric ' may involve the 'rejected', especially ideas of subversity. It is such an area for thinking, and may involve many aspects of critical thinking about religion, politics and so many assumptions which may exist in the nature of human social life.
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?

    I also wonder how how much of understanding of the esoteric, as opposed to the exoteric, stands in relation to the information age. Knowledge as 'out there ' may be so different. It is so much more about a widest view of knowledge, and it may be so much an exoteric quest, of information. To some extent, there is the issue as to whether the exoteric aspects of knowledge may be viewed witn a complete loss of the esoteric? Also, there is the question as to whether the 'esoteric" is to be understood simply as an aspect of the psychological, or in other ways of philosophy thinking?
  • Kant and the unattainable goal of empirical investigation

    My understanding of Kant is that he saw epistemological basis of knowledge as being a complex interplay of both the empirical and the nature of reason. Here, he definitely saw the 'noumenon' and the transcendent as being beyond the scope of comprehension. In this respect, he saw the limits of espistemology; with a sense of a possible 'transcendent' beyond comprehension. The idea and scope of reason was a way of approaching this territory of thought.

    The particular dichotomy between the 'known' or 'unknown' according to reason or the empirical is of particular significance in epistemological and empirical understanding. The two dichotomies may be opposed and how they are understood or juxtaposed may be of critical importance. In other words, to what extent is the basis of empirical knowledge important as a foundation of knowledge? To what extent may it be contrasted by a priori reason, or ideas of 'the noumenon'; which go beyond the physical basis of understanding of ideas.
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?

    Thanks for your reply and the whole issue of the esoteric and academic are an interesting contrast, especially in relation to the development of knowledge. Esotericism, apart from an approach of the 'inner' may involve certain elite groups. This may apply to the academic as well, and there may have been important power allegiances.

    I wonder how all of this stands in the information age. There is more of a demand for transparency and going beyond 'secrecy'. I wonder how this will come into effect, and what will remain 'secret' behind the scenes? Also, the information age gives so much access to knowledge, and how will this affect individuals' understanding? Does it mean that the quest for philosophical knowledge will be about assimilation of knowledge alone? This could be very different from the inner searching for meaning and knowledge.
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?

    I have read 'Phaedo' a few years ago and did read some of the thread on it on this forum, which I found helpful in thinking about the book.

    The entire idea of 'soul' is a very complex idea and used in such varying ways, including the question of the individual soul and beyond. I managed to think about it more clearly in relation to the transpersonal school of thought, including the ideas of Thomas More, which is more about the depths of human nature than a literal entity which survives as an individual construct.

    You are quite right to say that there are no clear Christian teachings because there are so many cross currents of thought, ranging from influences as diverse as Egyptian idea and the blending of ideas from Plato and Aristotle, such as in the thinking of Augustine and Aquinas, as well as ideas of Plotinus and many influences.

    It is probably wise to stay away from comparisons of Christianity and Buddhism which gloss over differences. I may have been influenced by such texts because I have read theosophical authors. Also, I probably dipped in and out of various Eastern texts in a rather chaotic manner, including those such as 'The Tibetan Book of the Dead'. In some ways, the academic study of the comparative religion is probably the most thorough. I did do a year of undergraduate studies in religious studies but that only covered the mere basics. Certainly, when studying Hinduism I was aware of the problems of translation and was at least fortunate to have a tutor who had studied Sanskrit.

    There is a danger of oversimplification and generalisations in approaching the various traditions. I am sure that this can result in some very confused thinking. I am sure that I have blended ideas together in a very haphazard way at times and it is easy to end up with some very strange conclusions, which may show the dangers of the speculative imagination in philosophy.
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?

    I find it hard to know how Socrates and Plato thought of immortality. I was taught by a tutor on the philosophy of religion that immortality may consist of life after death until a resurrection of 'the body at the end of the world. The tutor was a Christian, influenced by Plato.

    The idea of a 'heaven within' seems important in the interpretation of the Christian teaching, 'That it is easier for 'a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a rich man to get into the kingdom of God'. It is based on esoteric thinking although I was taught this in secondary Catholic school religious studies. Of course, it is in contrast to the exoteric wealth and splendour of the Vatican and the architecture of Rome.

    The idea of inner wealth of 'heaven within' is also captured in the Buddhist emphasis on nonattatchment. It is not the wealth itself which is being criticised ultimately, but the value being placed on material wealth as opposed to the treasure within'..
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?

    Misconceptions and blindness may have variable effects for people, depending on circumstances and intention. Fantasies and delusions may inspire great acts and art and the worst atrocities at all. It may be questionable whether it is better to be blindly inspired or let down by the exposure of the secrets and lies or survive the exposure of raw harsh truths.

    The acts of martyrdom may not have been taken on without a belief in a literal afterlife. It is questionable whether many current thinkers would be prepared to die like Socrates. The exoteric quest is more in favour of the needs and rights of the ego and 'monkey mind', as opposed to the heavenly, or inner treasures and quest for 'truth'. And, of course, an atheist may be able to go 'through the eye of a needle' in the search for truth and, esoteric atheism is a possibility.
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?

    At the moment, I don't feel overwhelmed by questions, and the actual existential aspects of life are greater. However, there have been times in which I was in the past, especially when working night shifts. I used to agonise and, generally, I find that night thinking is more fear based. But, saying that, I do really enjoy philosophy and the exploration of new ways of seeing and framing 'reality'. The mysteries themselves are part of the adventure.
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?

    The movement of freethinking is a useful one, in spite of its link with freemasonry. As far as the idea of flourishing despite the presence of mysteries, it is important because there is the opposite danger of becoming unable to do so.

    The worst possibility is to become so burdened by the nature of philosophical problems as to be incapacitated or dysfunctional. At an an extreme point, it would be possible to become so overwhelmed as if one needed answers in order to live. This may defeat the purpose of life as a quest rather than as a solution. It is not as if answers can always be found and this not mean that the questions are not worth asking, for generating creativity.