Nietzsche and Christianity - Metaphysical Idealist Critique

[Lou Gold]

As Sisyphus drives
philosophers to more words
and musicians to more notes,
the poet observes
Eternity is in love with the productions of time.
All good,
unless you disagree.

And, yes, the Second Coming might just pop out of the quantum soup offered by the instinctually loving hole or whole.

[AshvinP]

The fact that our brain allows us to create a safe 'heaven' and to imagine that we are independent creative beings free of any entanglements with other beings, doesn't mean that it is so. Out of sight is truly out of mind but by no means out of reality. Our Karma, Angels, the Folk Spirits, the Sun Spirits, etc., etc. all are part of the interference of our experience - irrelevant if we recognize it or not. If we don't recognize it we are simply launched on a out-of-control ride after death because we have simply neglected to learn what it means to be in control. We are in control not when we imagine ourselves free from the Grand Cosmic idea beings, which give the macro shape of our perspective but precisely when we understand how our perspective comes together, when we discover our relations with these beings. In our physical state we 'hijack' that creative Life of the "I" for our own purposes. After death we quickly dissociate from it and find ourselves as a leaf carried by the winds. Why we dissociate? Because we no longer have personal life, we can't imagine this or that - all we experience is our Karmic entanglement with all beings. If we are to have "I" Life in this state it can only by Macrocosmic Life. And this is why we shy away. We want our "I" life but we want it only for ourselves. When we find ourselves out of the body we let that Life go because we're not yet interested in participating in the Cosmic Life of the "I". Yet in that state it is either Cosmic Life of the "I" or no "I" at all. That's why the Christ impulse is in reality the impulse of Love. We can never experience the Karmic landscape of humanity objectively as long as we are only interested in our own Karma, imagining that once we've settled it we'll be free to do as we please and freely choose to associate or not with other beings. Once we've settled our personal Karma we continue with settling the Karma of all humanity. And this can happen only if we accept the impulse of Love. This means to see every human being as valuable and important as ourselves and to realize that it's not enough to be compassionate. This secretly affirms that we are separate beings, all on their personal paths. We help each other along the way but then we say 'farewell' and imagine the we go to follow our Cosmic voyages. Love is active, creative force. Our only Cosmic voyage is to participate in the unfoldment of the Cosmic organism that we are entangled with - which is what we are. And we can only participate in the true sense if we choose voluntarily to associate with the beings of Life and Love because only from that perspective we can understand our position in the Whole and how to unfold our own creative activity in the best possible way - not for our personal enjoyment but for the work on the Cosmic Organism. This is the only work that results in real Joy. Every other endeavor has a secret shadow of egoism. Only when we give our life for the Whole through Love, we can experience Joy without shadows.

Thank you for this inspiring elaboration!

The above reminded me of Heidegger's "being-towards-death", that "death is the supreme testimony of Being". Heidegger and Steiner also expressed many similar thoughts on 'thinking about thinking', and how we are not yet thinking. The former suggested that Being and thinking "belong together" and the voice of the ego becomes "merely another appearance within the clearing" when we are engaged in genuine thinking. There is a very interesting paper about this for anyone who wants to check it out. It focuses mostly on Steiner and I will quote a few excerpts below.

https://www.academia.edu/12089875/On_th ... lf_Steiner

The German word Lichtung contains the word for light, Licht. Surely, it is no coincidence that Heidegger chose this word, since light has a long standing connection with reason, and thinking is the main faculty of reason. It is ‘‘by the light of reason’’ that we see the logical connections between ideas. However, the light that appears in the Lichtung is not the classical light of reason, for ‘‘the light of reason does not heed the opening’’ (1977a,p. 386). It needs it, but does not heed it, nor does it produce it. The light of reason is not the same as the light that appears in genuine thinking. ‘‘[T]hinking must become explicitly aware of the opening’’ (ibid., p. 385), and in this opening ‘‘rests a possible radiance, that is, the possible presencing of presence itself’’ (ibid., p. 387; italics mine). Obviously, this radiance is another kind of light than the light of reason.

It seems obvious that by ‘‘ontologizing’’ thinking, Heidegger continues (albeit in different mode) a strand of thought which can be found in the mysticism of a Meister Eckhardt or in the objective idealism of a Hegel: the human being is understood as a highly significant ontological category. In the human being something takes place which is essential for Being as such. Thinking Being entails ‘‘the mutual appropriation of man and Being’’, through a leap of thought: "What a curious leap, presumably yielding us the insight that we do not reside sufficiently as yet where in reality we already are. Where are we? In what constellation of Being and man?"
...
Rudolf Steiner (1861–1925) has recently been called the best kept secret of the twentieth century (Schickler 2005). Generally perceived and disregarded as an ‘‘occultist’’ or mystic, few academic researchers bother to study his works. It is therefore little known that he held a doctorate in philosophy and published many texts highly relevant for the philosophical discussions at the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth century (cf. Wel-burn 2004). As a 21-year-old student of the natural sciences he was appointed editor of Goethe’s scientific writings for the then standard German edition of Goethe’s works. Later on he was widely respected as an intellectual force in the German-speaking world, before he ‘‘disgraced himself’’ academically by becoming an active member of the Theosophical movement.

In a lecture given in Berlin in 1914, Steiner (1991a) characterizes human thinking in away which from a general point of view is similar to Heidegger. One of the first things he says is that human beings seldom really think. Instead, we are content with words. Furthermore, the situation is such that in order to realize that we do not really think, we have to—think. It is evident that thinking for Steiner is different from the ‘‘mental talk’’ of everyday life, the major part of which, if one is honest, consists of associations of words and memories. For Steiner, genuine thinking is alive; it is an intense spiritual activity. It uses concepts and ideas not in static forms, but as dynamic possibilities. At the same time it is clear and precise...

As a simple example Steiner (1991a) takes the concept of the triangle. This concept encompasses all triangles in whatever shape. In thinking the
concept triangle, and not of a particular triangle, we have to think of the sides of the triangle as in constant movement in relation to each other. This is what every mathematician or geometrician must do intuitively (consciously or unconsciously) if she wants her reasoning to be general and not just about one particular triangle. Yet this original intuitive experience of a concept seems, according to Steiner, not be accommodated within most academic philosophical systems. Philosophers have often been too intent on fixing the definition of words in static linguistic structures. Concepts are rarely understood as dynamic essences...

Steiner takes a vital step beyond Heidegger by emphasizing the fact that in the everyday state of consciousness there is usually no awareness of our thinking activity; we are only aware of its results, which are the thoughts that it produces. We know what we think (more or less), but not how. In everyday life, we are not conscious of the mental activity as such, which gives rise to the thoughts we have. Yet it is precisely the transition from one thought to another that is accomplished by means of thinking as activity. Any particular thought is only a product or result of this activity; it is no longer active thinking, but a finished shed thought.

It may be argued that thinking activity is always accompanied by thoughts, which cast their veil over the activity, clouding it over so to speak. Aristotle was very firm on this, claiming that thinking is always accompanied by what he calls phantasms, what we today would probably call mental images, representations, or words (for a elucidating treatment of this issue, see Castoriadis 1997a). For Aristotle, nothing exists without (some form of) matter except ‘‘thought thinking itself’’, noesis noeseos, pure activity (energeia), what he also called God or the supreme Being. From this point of view, human beings cannot expect to experience pure thinking activity, thinking without phantasms. Here Steiner would perhaps say that the conditions of possibility for pure thinking have changed after the event of Christ, since thereby (according to common Christian belief) ‘‘God became human’’.

Lou, even you may like this one because the author looks a lot like you

[Cleric K]

The above reminded me of Heidegger's "being-towards-death", that "death is the supreme testimony of Being". Heidegger and Steiner also expressed many similar thoughts on 'thinking about thinking', and how we are not yet thinking. The former suggested that Being and thinking "belong together" and the voice of the ego becomes "merely another appearance within the clearing" when we are engaged in genuine thinking. There is a very interesting paper about this for anyone who wants to check it out. It focuses mostly on Steiner and I will quote a few excerpts below.

Thanks Ashvin, great find!

This morning I've had an idea for a visual representation. Not that different from the color discs but can be used to tie together few otherwise disparate topics. It's just a question if I'll be able to put it together with my 'artistic' capabilities

[SanteriSatama]

Being-towards-death resonates well also with the masculine aspect of being and becoming the Seed, whether we think of death and life as continuous entanglement of rebirth in each draw of breath, or as the passage of throwing our spirit from this flesh into the cosmic Womb.

As our consciousness expands, we are not only the spear point, but all that we gather in our loving care, all that our seek for more wisdom brings into consideration.

[Lou Gold]

Being-towards-death resonates well also with the masculine aspect of being and becoming the Seed, whether we think of death and life as continuous entanglement of rebirth in each draw of breath, or as the passage of throwing our spirit from this flesh into the cosmic Womb.

As our consciousness expands, we are not only the spear point, but all that we gather in our loving care, all that our seek for more wisdom brings into consideration.

Yup, and there's much to be found in spinning the telescope to focus in all directions, to zoom in on all relations.

[AshvinP]

The above reminded me of Heidegger's "being-towards-death", that "death is the supreme testimony of Being". Heidegger and Steiner also expressed many similar thoughts on 'thinking about thinking', and how we are not yet thinking. The former suggested that Being and thinking "belong together" and the voice of the ego becomes "merely another appearance within the clearing" when we are engaged in genuine thinking. There is a very interesting paper about this for anyone who wants to check it out. It focuses mostly on Steiner and I will quote a few excerpts below.

Thanks Ashvin, great find!

This morning I've had an idea for a visual representation. Not that different from the color discs but can be used to tie together few otherwise disparate topics. It's just a question if I'll be able to put it together with my 'artistic' capabilities

I have faith you will and can't wait to see the result

[Lou Gold]

It may be argued that thinking activity is always accompanied by thoughts, which cast their veil over the activity, clouding it over so to speak. Aristotle was very firm on this, claiming that thinking is always accompanied by what he calls phantasms, what we today would probably call mental images, representations, or words (for a elucidating treatment of this issue, see Castoriadis 1997a). For Aristotle, nothing exists without (some form of) matter except ‘‘thought thinking itself’’, noesis noeseos, pure activity (energeia), what he also called God or the supreme Being. From this point of view, human beings cannot expect to experience pure thinking activity, thinking without phantasms. Here Steiner would perhaps say that the conditions of possibility for pure thinking have changed after the event of Christ, since thereby (according to common Christian belief) ‘‘God became human’’.

Lou, even you may like this one because the author looks a lot like you


[/quote]

Quite possibly but not because of the likeness. Because we are all children of God, needing perhaps only to practice forgiving each other.

[Soul_of_Shu]

Descent is Ascent: How the road up is the road down in Dante's Divine Comedy ~ Mark Vernon

[Simon Adams]

Dante is great. Some good stuff hidden in there. It’s also interesting that he has the lower steps of the inferno (e.g. pride) as the most serious.

Funnily enough I used Dante as a theme at work for a presentation on remote working under covid.

This is part of a table from that...

[Lou Gold]

Dante is great. Some good stuff hidden in there. It’s also interesting that he has the lower steps of the inferno (e.g. pride) as the most serious.

Funnily enough I used Dante as a theme at work for a presentation on remote working under covid.

This is part of a table from that...

This is way cool Simon. Is the full presentation available somewhere?