Jim Cross wrote: ↑Sun Dec 05, 2021 1:46 pm
Of course, this might be more work for the moderator.
Yup, and likely may have to wait for a succession process. Any volunteers? (Notwithstanding the process portrayed in the HBO series )
One thing about having a single dedicated forum/topic to BK or analytical idealism would be that it might satisfy somebody like Eugene who is only looking for that. Comments or topics not strictly related to BK or something he said or wrote would be off limits. One or two pinned posts might also be a useful reference for people coming with basic questions. The other forums could ramble on about all sorts of other stuff.
He will write plenty about spirituality, mysticism, secular science, NDEs, psy-phenomena of all sorts... as long as it's not specifially Western esotericism with too much detail.
Last edited by AshvinP on Sun Dec 05, 2021 4:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Most people would sooner regard themselves as a piece of lava in the moon than as an 'I'"
Jim Cross wrote: ↑Sun Dec 05, 2021 3:34 pm
One thing about having a single dedicated forum/topic to BK or analytical idealism would be that it might satisfy somebody like Eugene who is only looking for that. Comments or topics not strictly related to BK or something he said or wrote would be off limits. One or two pinned posts might also be a useful reference for people coming with basic questions. The other forums could ramble on about all sorts of other stuff.
Surely the Kantian divide is related to analytical idealism in general, and as expressed in Mark's latest topic-specific post, valid or not, a case has been made that BK's model may actually be perpetuating it, a claim which of course is open to being contested. This is why I suggest that topics related to BK's work should be focused on a specific aspect of his work, and posted in the topic-specific section, where I can ensure that it stays focused on the specific aspect, without being sidetracked into assertions about the Kantian divide. Seems like a simple enough solution.
Here out of instinct or grace we seek
soulmates in these galleries of hieroglyph and glass,
where mutual longings and sufferings of love
are laid bare in transfigured exhibition of our hearts,
we who crave deep secrets and mysteries,
as elusive as the avatars of our dreams.
Martin_ wrote: ↑Sun Dec 05, 2021 4:48 pm
Right, so a discussion whether Analytic Idealism perpetuates the Kantian Divide or not, is a good example of a topic belonging to the BK subforum.
And why not to the topic-specific forum, since it's surely topic-specific?
Here out of instinct or grace we seek
soulmates in these galleries of hieroglyph and glass,
where mutual longings and sufferings of love
are laid bare in transfigured exhibition of our hearts,
we who crave deep secrets and mysteries,
as elusive as the avatars of our dreams.
Martin_ wrote: ↑Sun Dec 05, 2021 4:48 pm
Right, so a discussion whether Analytic Idealism perpetuates the Kantian Divide or not, is a good example of a topic belonging to the BK subforum.
And why not to the topic-specific forum, since it's surely topic-specific?
I like Martin's suggestion. The site is metakastrup so having a somewhat dedicated area to BK makes sense to me.
There are certainly also BK-related topics - for example, NDE, supernatural, etc - that would be open ended and wouldn't fit in the topic-specific one.
Ok, so I'm getting some significant interest in a BK related sub-forum. So what would be the guidelines for moderating it? Are we saying that all discussion there should be focused on explicating or elaborating upon BK's model, and that any critique of the model, regardless of how well thought through, is off limits, and should be expressed elsewhere?
Here out of instinct or grace we seek
soulmates in these galleries of hieroglyph and glass,
where mutual longings and sufferings of love
are laid bare in transfigured exhibition of our hearts,
we who crave deep secrets and mysteries,
as elusive as the avatars of our dreams.
I think some people come here for just the BK stuff. Having a 'just BK section would focus that traffic.
Historically, this attachment to BK was implied in a sense; "everything" was about analytic idealism, but since the discussions now span a multitude of subjects, some not specifically about Analytic Idealism, it might be good to point out here are the BK discussions.
Soul_of_Shu wrote: ↑Sun Dec 05, 2021 6:31 pm
Ok, so I'm getting some significant interest in a BK related sub-forum. So what would be the guidelines for moderating it? Are we saying that all discussion there should be focused on explicating or elaborating upon BK's model, and that any critique of the model, regardless of how well thought through, is off limits, and should be expressed elsewhere?
I would think the starting point for most topics would be a paper, video, tweet, book, or something other directly from BK. It could also about another person's view of his model from either an agreeing or disagreeing standpoint. From there topics could be about clarifying, elaborating, or disagreeing with it. I think as Ashvin pointed out there would be quite a range of topics since BK has posted views on QM, psychedelics, life after death, Karl Friston, Donald Hoffman, Schopenhauer, Jung, materialism critiques, and more.
Soul_of_Shu wrote: ↑Sun Dec 05, 2021 6:31 pm
Ok, so I'm getting some significant interest in a BK related sub-forum. So what would be the guidelines for moderating it? Are we saying that all discussion there should be focused on explicating or elaborating upon BK's model, and that any critique of the model, regardless of how well thought through, is off limits, and should be expressed elsewhere?
No.
Bernardo has now created enough content to explicate a comprehensive world view (or you could say he has added academic rigour to the non dual traditions of the east and west). One can argue the intricacies of this view, but it stands on it's own feet, and has arguably had some very positive influences on people's lives. I'm thinking of people that read Rupert Spira, Krishnamurti, Nissargadatta etc, but are intellectually inclined and need analytics to supplement their understanding.
For many people (myself included) this is tantamount to a way of life that has many fascinating implications. I might quibble about nuanced points of theory, but ultimately I respect Bernardo and have no desire to topple him in favour of some other neglected genius. Room for quibble, but respect and honour for Bernardo's work and vision.
I'm extremely allergic to views like "but it looks bad!". that attitude is essetially what drives cancel culture. If this isn't the place where depth is allowed, (resulting in discusisons that might be perceived as "criticism towards BK") i don't know what to say.
So, yes; criticism is/should be allowed. Where else would you criticize BK but in the BK forum? (this is not a fanclub)
)
