Thoughts on U.G. Krishnamurti?

[Eugene I]

Not really. Mystical communion is the return to an ontologically more "primitive" state (I'm not using this word in any pejorative sense, I just mean to imply that the primordial consciousness state is FROM WHICH thinking minds emerged). And I'm not against the experiencing of such communion, on the contrary: I think it should be part of everyone's life. But I don't agree that our LIFE's purpose is this communion, since we are going to return to it anyway after we die. So there should be a significance to individual life, that is complementary, not inferior, to the state of communion.

100% agree
On the other hand, if some individual locus of life for some reason makes such communion a sole purpose of its individual life, it is always free to do so and there is nothing wrong with that either.

What if the Life's purpose is not to have a single purpose for Life as a whole, but to have a variety of purposes and experiences of Life through a variety of paths each pursuing its own purpose?

[Hedge90]

Not really. Mystical communion is the return to an ontologically more "primitive" state (I'm not using this word in any pejorative sense, I just mean to imply that the primordial consciousness state is FROM WHICH thinking minds emerged). And I'm not against the experiencing of such communion, on the contrary: I think it should be part of everyone's life. But I don't agree that our LIFE's purpose is this communion, since we are going to return to it anyway after we die. So there should be a significance to individual life, that is complementary, not inferior, to the state of communion.

100% agree
On the other hand, if some individual locus of life for some reason makes such communion a sole purpose of its individual life, it is always free to do so and there is nothing wrong with that either.

What if the Life's purpose is not to have a single purpose for Life as a whole, but to have a variety of purposes and experiences of Life through a variety of paths each pursuing its own purpose?

That really depends on whether MAL is metacognitive or not. If it is, then by definition, our life's purpose is what its purpose is for us. If it isn't, then WE ARE its metacognitice faculty, so it's us who should come up with purpose(s).

[Papanca]

The same objection can be applied to this objection : why did the spiritual/contemplative path emerge, didn't it also emerge out of the cosmic mind in this scenario ? Why should it be considered an accident or a travesty ? After all, both thinking and the desire to reduce thinking, both the normal state of consciousness and altered states of consciousness did emerge out of the cosmic mind in this scenario.

Not really. Mystical communion is the return to an ontologically more "primitive" state (I'm not using this word in any pejorative sense, I just mean to imply that the primordial consciousness state is FROM WHICH thinking minds emerged). And I'm not against the experiencing of such communion, on the contrary: I think it should be part of everyone's life. But I don't agree that our LIFE's purpose is this communion, since we are going to return to it anyway after we die. So there should be a significance to individual life, that is complementary, not inferior, to the state of communion.

I'm not disagreeing with you, i think just that there is often a tendency to go the other extreme : where any amount of meditation/renunciation/non-thinking type of spirituality is seen as something to be shunned or considered in a pejorative fashion.

[Eugene I]

What if the Life's purpose is not to have a single purpose for Life as a whole, but to have a variety of purposes and experiences of Life through a variety of paths each pursuing its own purpose?

That really depends on whether MAL is metacognitive or not. If it is, then by definition, our life's purpose is what its purpose is for us. If it isn't, then WE ARE its metacognitice faculty, so it's us who should come up with purpose(s).

Well, even if it is metacognitive, it's purpose may still be Life encompassing a variety of purposes.

I suspect that the telos of MAL (if it is metacognitive, which I tend to agree with) is actually exploring and experiencing the unlimited universe of all possible conscious forms through a multitude of subjective perspectives (of alters), which necessarily includes a vast variety of different life goals and values, including the ones that go against such MAL overall life purpose.

[Hedge90]

What if the Life's purpose is not to have a single purpose for Life as a whole, but to have a variety of purposes and experiences of Life through a variety of paths each pursuing its own purpose?

That really depends on whether MAL is metacognitive or not. If it is, then by definition, our life's purpose is what its purpose is for us. If it isn't, then WE ARE its metacognitice faculty, so it's us who should come up with purpose(s).

Well, even if it is metacognitive, it's purpose may still be Life encompassing a variety of purposes.

I suspect that the telos of MAL (if it is metacognitive, which I tend to agree with) is actually exploring and experiencing the unlimited universe of all possible conscious forms through a multitude of subjective perspectives (of alters), which necessarily includes a vast variety of different life goals and values, including the ones that go against such MAL overall life purpose.

While there's nothing inherently illogical or impossible about what you said, I instinctively don't like this line of thought, just as I hated the multiverse theory when I was a materialist. The "every possibility is taking place simultaneously" scenario somehow takes meaning out of everything. If everything happens, nothing is unique or meaningful. And it also leads to the necessity of utterly, incomprehensibly horrifying timelines and universes.

But then again, I'm just the neuron of MAL who doesn't like this idea, and you are another neuron who does

[Soul_of_Shu]

I suspect that the telos of MAL (if it is metacognitive, which I tend to agree with) is actually exploring and experiencing the unlimited universe of all possible conscious forms through a multitude of subjective perspectives (of alters), which necessarily includes a vast variety of different life goals and values, including the ones that go against such MAL overall life purpose.

Seems like 'self'-perpetuating dream disorder

[Hedge90]

On a sidenote, while I choose to place my belief in a teleological MAL, as it gives me a sense of purpose and meaning, I'm also a person morbidly drawn towards the worst possible thought experiments. And there's a lingering existential dread in the back of my mind about what if it is really just about MAL hiding itself from itself because its original state of existence is something dreadful. There's nothing experiential telling me this, because the mystical experiences I had were beautiful, but well, I haven't been to the bottom of the abyss.

[Papanca]

Not really. Mystical communion is the return to an ontologically more "primitive" state (I'm not using this word in any pejorative sense, I just mean to imply that the primordial consciousness state is FROM WHICH thinking minds emerged). And I'm not against the experiencing of such communion, on the contrary: I think it should be part of everyone's life. But I don't agree that our LIFE's purpose is this communion, since we are going to return to it anyway after we die. So there should be a significance to individual life, that is complementary, not inferior, to the state of communion.

100% agree
On the other hand, if some individual locus of life for some reason makes such communion a sole purpose of its individual life, it is always free to do so and there is nothing wrong with that either.

What if the Life's purpose is not to have a single purpose for Life as a whole, but to have a variety of purposes and experiences of Life through a variety of paths each pursuing its own purpose?

This seems to me not only as more reasonable, but it also makes for better ethics as it strenghtens tolerance and acceptance of others views and ways of being.

[Hedge90]

Not really. Mystical communion is the return to an ontologically more "primitive" state (I'm not using this word in any pejorative sense, I just mean to imply that the primordial consciousness state is FROM WHICH thinking minds emerged). And I'm not against the experiencing of such communion, on the contrary: I think it should be part of everyone's life. But I don't agree that our LIFE's purpose is this communion, since we are going to return to it anyway after we die. So there should be a significance to individual life, that is complementary, not inferior, to the state of communion.

100% agree
On the other hand, if some individual locus of life for some reason makes such communion a sole purpose of its individual life, it is always free to do so and there is nothing wrong with that either.

What if the Life's purpose is not to have a single purpose for Life as a whole, but to have a variety of purposes and experiences of Life through a variety of paths each pursuing its own purpose?

This seems to me not only as more reasonable, but it also makes for better ethics as it strenghtens tolerance and acceptance of others views and ways of being.

It doesn't make for any kind of ethics. It makes for "nothing is true, everything is permitted".

[Eugene I]

Seems like 'self'-perpetuating dream disorder

Or why not self-perpetuating dream in-order?