Gramsci and idealism

[Lou Gold]

Good Shu. Please hold your skepticism because one possible outcome can be a conclusion that metaphysics has little or no relevance for the practical world where the rubber meets the road. OTOH, I'm hoping that a linking of Idealism and Praxis might make metaphysics relevant in practical ways.

Roughly speaking, materialistic praxis is for extroverts, idealism for ontic introverts - you've heard the slogan "Be. the change you want"

Extrovert and introvert, that I am -- sort of a gregarious hermit who is constantly figuring out how to embrace my many contradictions. Occasionally, I succeed in being the change I want to see but surely nothing to brag about. Right now I'm intrigued by Justin's assertion of a possible bridge or linking of idealism and praxis. I don't need certainty on this. The promise of perhaps would hold my heart in a happy way.

[Lou Gold]

That is a key point. American pragmatism does not seem much different from "absolute idealism" and "praxis" process philosophy based on the Wiki and quotes provided ("absolute idealism" is an odd label for a philosophy which wants to stay away from absolutes), except the former does not explicitly endorse any political economic theory. [Pragmatism] It is representative of many people across the entire political spectrum, except for the very tail extremes. Marxism and neo-Marxism have never done a good job staying away from such extremes, which makes me think there is something underlying the theory, which is no doubt metaphysical, and makes its genuine adopters always seek out extreme political 'solutions'. In that sense, they are anti-pragmatic worldviews.

I grok your drift. However, much the same can be said about Christianity, which surely has had its extreme phases. But my point is not to compare the 'numbers'. Perhaps, religion falls into dogmatic idealist ideologies and secularity falls into dogmatic materialist ideologies (all within consciousness, of course, ).

[Soul_of_Shu]

Great Shu. Please hold onto your position. Just understand that I am NOT arguing that Harari has presents a nuanced metaphysical argument. The best I can tell he is a materialist. My position is simply that he reveals something relevant to praxis and Gramsci, which is the theme of this thread and that this may challenge the relevance of the so-called "nuanced metaphysical position" to a practical world in a time of existential crisis.

And my point continues to be that we all could repeatedly post dozens of such articles, which you seem intent on doing, that point to a dysfunctional political praxis and other symptoms of the current deprived paradigm, while offering no clue in terms of articulating a nuanced alternative to the deprived paradigm as the basis upon which a corresponding new political praxis could be conceived. Unlike Harari, Bernardo and others are at least prioritizing and attempting this, however much it may still be a work in progress. And until such a counter-materialist alternative is clearly prioritized and cogently articulated, such that it might be understood and instilled into the collective mindset to some major degree, then we're stuck with the dysfunctional political praxis and other symptoms born of the current deprived paradigm that must first be displaced. It doesn't work the other way around, and just repeatedly pointing to the symptoms does nothing to address the root of the problem. Hence I suggest that the focus here first and foremost be on posting pieces that do offer some nuanced articulation of a viable alternative to the current deprived paradigm, and not solely focus on its dysfunctional political praxis and other symptoms that are inextricably mired within it, while vaguely speculating about what better political praxis might supplant it, but cannot ever supplant it unless the former is first addressed. So again, I've put this to the forum participants, and asked if there were any concerns about requiring that such pieces being posted as topics of discussion actually articulate some nuanced metaphysical focus and intention written into them, and no-one has voiced any objection to this. Therefore I will continue to moderate accordingly, in an effort to keep this forum focused on its primary intention.

[Lou Gold]

Great Shu. Please hold onto your position. Just understand that I am NOT arguing that Harari has presents a nuanced metaphysical argument. The best I can tell he is a materialist. My position is simply that he reveals something relevant to praxis and Gramsci, which is the theme of this thread and that this may challenge the relevance of the so-called "nuanced metaphysical position" to a practical world in a time of existential crisis.

And my point continues to be that we all could repeatedly post dozens of such articles, which you seem intent on doing, that point to a dysfunctional political praxis and other symptoms of the current deprived paradigm, while offering no clue in terms of articulating a nuanced alternative to the deprived paradigm as the basis upon which a corresponding new political praxis could be conceived. Unlike Harari, Bernardo and others are at least prioritizing and attempting this, however much it may still be a work in progress. And until such a counter-materialist alternative is clearly prioritized and cogently articulated, such that it might be understood and instilled into the collective mindset to some major degree, then we're stuck with the dysfunctional political praxis and other symptoms born of the current deprived paradigm that must first be displaced. It doesn't work the other way around, and just repeatedly pointing to the symptoms does nothing to address the root of the problem. Hence I suggest that the focus here first and foremost be on posting pieces that do offer some nuanced articulation of a viable alternative to the current deprived paradigm, and not solely focus on its dysfunctional political praxis and other symptoms that are inextricably mired within it, while vaguely speculating about what better political praxis might supplant it, but cannot ever supplant it unless the former is first addressed. So again, I've put this to the forum participants, and asked if there were any concerns about requiring that such pieces being posted as topics of discussion actually articulate some nuanced metaphysical focus and intention written into them, and no-one has voiced any objection to this. Therefore I will continue to moderate accordingly, in an effort to keep this forum focused on its primary intention.

Go for it. I'm gonna continue my interest in praxis. This thread seems as a good place to do it. I suspect that a current deprived paradigm is the result of a currently deprived species that events may alter along with its paradigm. Whether the changes will be more materialist, more idealist, more both/and or more yet-to-be-imaged is in play.

[Soul_of_Shu]

Go for it. I'm gonna continue my interest in praxis.

I suppose I'm just not getting the interest in redundantly being reminded of, and bemoaning a dysfunctional political praxis that is never going to change since it's inextricably mired in a deprived paradigm that must first be displaced, and which an impotent praxis co-dependently wedded to it has no power to displace. I suppose I could be interested in some better political praxis that might be engendered by a shift to a counter-materialist paradigm ~ a praxis which can't come about until such a shift actually occurs. I guess we have very different ideas of where the most practical attention/intention should be focused.

[SanteriSatama]

Extrovert and introvert, that I am -- sort of a gregarious hermit who is constantly figuring out how to embrace my many contradictions. Occasionally, I succeed in being the change I want to see but surely nothing to brag about. Right now I'm intrigued by Justin's assertion of a possible bridge or linking of idealism and praxis. I don't need certainty on this. The promise of perhaps would hold my heart in a happy way.

I figure that your deep concept of praxis still largely comes from practice of activism, juicing up for do-gooderism. The Marxist concept of praxis, changing society from extrovert application of a theory. Marxist metaphysics is dialectics, ie. "embracing many contradictions".

Greek has three related words, praxis - doing; poiesis - making, and techne - crafting. In the context of this context, praxis stays firmly inside the frame of subject-object metaphysics, the qualia of material, where our relations are perceived as social fabric.

The relation subjective-asubjective (ie. relation between praxis and non-dualism) is not a polarity, but rather "dialectic" of dialectics-antidialectics. Can you grok and embrace that contradiction?

Poiesis and techne; poetry, crafting, skill learning and honing, these reside and recite mainly in the asubjective ground.

Praxis is a theory - or a feel - of an existing condition. If the desire is changing a condition, extroverted doing for the sake of doing does not change the condition, doing maintains and upholds the condition by law of polar dialectics. An introverted meaning for praxis becomes the moment of recognizing a condition and the desire it creates, whether the desire is to maintain and continue a condition, or to change a condition. Moment of recognizing a desire for change becomes thus impetus or leaving the domain of praxis and dropping down to the ground of skill, craft and poetry. Becoming more by doing less.

Praxis like ritual work etc. is good for conserving and repeating, useless for change. Ritual of doing politics only maintains the social fabric that causes frustration and desire for change, also and especially when doing politics "opposes".

“You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.”
- Buckminster Fuller

[Jim Cross]

So again, I've put this to the forum participants, and asked if there were any concerns about requiring that such pieces being posted as topics of discussion actually articulate some nuanced metaphysical focus and intention written into them, and no-one has voiced any objection to this. Therefore I will continue to moderate accordingly, in an effort to keep this forum focused on its primary intention.

I agree 100% with this approach. Perhaps there should be forum for Metaphysically Relevant Politics so it would be isolated to one area and people would know what they were getting into. Same rule would apply that there must be some connection to mind, consciousness, or metaphysics.

[Soul_of_Shu]

Praxis like ritual work etc. is good for conserving and repeating, useless for change. Ritual of doing politics only maintains the social fabric that causes frustration and desire for change, also and especially when doing politics "opposes".

Just highlighting this

[Lou Gold]

Go for it. I'm gonna continue my interest in praxis.

I suppose I'm just not getting the interest in redundantly being reminded of, and bemoaning a dysfunctional political praxis that is never going to change since it's inextricably mired in a deprived paradigm that must first be displaced, and which an impotent praxis co-dependently wedded to it has no power to displace. I suppose I could be interested in some better political praxis that might be engendered by a shift to a counter-materialist paradigm ~ a praxis which can't come about until such a shift actually occurs. I guess we have very different ideas of where the most practical attention/intention should be focused.

Perhaps one way to express this is with "A problem can't be solved with the thinking that created it." In this sense, it seems obvious that no "solution", whether inspired by Idealism or Materialism, can work before the so-called "paradigm shift." In the premature state all efforts are "deprived" and may even become "depraved". One can go deeper and even suggest that all manifestation arrives with an Evil Twin. The world, like people, does not change until it is ready. Thus we wait with despair, hope or detachment for the Right Moment and Auspicious Event or for an Interdependent Co-arising" or for a Second Coming or for a Paradigm Shift.

Meanwhile, I'm not sure if we actually "have very different ideas of where the most practical attention/intention should be focused." In a gnarly uncertain crisis like a global pandemic, where do you think "the most practical attention/intention should be focused" and how?

[Soul_of_Shu]

Meanwhile, I'm not sure if we actually "have very different ideas of where the most practical attention/intention should be focused." In a gnarly uncertain crisis like a global pandemic, where do you think "the most practical attention/intention should be focused" and how?

For this work-in-progress psyche it's being focused, as best one can, on being a clear and present example of what sensibilities a counter-materialist paradigm might engender, as opposed to being focused on repeatedly pointing at and bemoaning, to no avail, the many dysfunctional examples of what the current deprived paradigm has engendered.