Why does it matter?

[Ed Konderla]

Since my wife made me aware of Bernardos work (which she finds tedious) I have become aware of the profession of philosophy for the first time in my 67 years. I have read numerous books I guess that deal with philosophy starting with Victor Frankl's "Man's Search For Meaning" when I was 14 years old.
Now calling it a profession may not be entirely accurate, maybe calling it a sideline for many, might be better. I did a search in Amazon Kindle Ebooks using only the word philosophy and it showed "over 50,000 results". Don't know if that means there were 50001 or eleventy gazillion. On Youtube there seems to be an endless number of philosophers competing for attention. This points to a tremendous desire for philosophers to get their 2 cents worth out there and likewise a tremendous number of people shopping for a philosophy. I have enjoyed the intellectual discussions although many of them seem to degenerate into how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. The comments seem to be peppered with quotes from really smart people saying really smart things. This causes me to ponder and ask "Why?". Does pursuing philosophical thought at this level of intensity give people's lives meaning where none existed before? Are all of these philosophers really any different than Jehovah's Witnesses attempting to convince you they have "it" figured out better than anyone else? Are the followers and enthusiasts people with too much time on their hands? I would love to see what other people think especially if they can express themselves without quoting someone else.

[Ben Iscatus]

A recent view (shared by Bernardo) is that philosophers in the last century have become much too fond of conceptualizing (angels on the head of a pin stuff, as you say) without due reference to our primary experience. BK's philosophy deliberately attempts to refer first of all to subjective experience rather than abstract conceptualizing. It refers back to Advaita Vedanta, the original and best, updating it for the modern audience.

[Eugene I]

It's the same as to ask why people bother playing music or drawing art if they can spent that time eating or watching serials. Or asking why scientists enjoy doing science (apart from just making money from it). It is very natural to be curious and wanting to know what the world is and how it works and who we are as part of the world and what is the meaning of all of this. That is what all of us do when we are small children and that is a wonderful part of being a human, being creative and open to the world. But many of us lose that curiosity when we grow up and become mostly concern with survival and pursuing our narrow personal goals following our instincts that we inherited from ancestors without bothering much with the meaning of them. So I would rather revert the question: what makes those people lose their natural curiosity and so narrowly limit their range of interests in life?

[Ed Konderla]

Unlike my wife I enjoy Bernardo and have purchased and read all of his books. He was my first exposure to idealism. I had already come to the conclusion the answer was something like that so it took very little convincing to get me to jump on the bandwagon.



















b

[Ed Konderla]

It's the same as to ask why people bother playing music or drawing art if they can spent that time eating or watching serials. Or asking why scientists enjoy doing science (apart from just making money from it). It is very natural to be curious and wanting to know what the world is and how it works and who we are as part of the world and what is the meaning of all of this. That is what all of us do when we are small children and that is a wonderful part of being a human, being creative and open to the world. But many of us lose that curiosity when we grow up and become mostly concern with survival and pursuing our narrow personal goals following our instincts that we inherited from ancestors without bothering much with the meaning of them. So I would rather revert the question: what makes those people lose their natural curiosity and so narrowly limit their range of interests in life?

Just to be clear I agree with the part about music. I was also a professional artist. I probably have one of the few Leslie speakers in Ecuador hooked to my keyboard sitting in my little earthbag house my wife and I built with our own two hands. Unlike science philosophy's laboratory is the mind. At some level I feel capable of mapping out my own path without relying on someone else. You have the same data available to you as others if you get out and live life. I've known a number of intellectuals that their life experience is based on books and classrooms. Everything they know about the world comes vicariously plus that world many times convinces them of their own self importance. They then go out and write a book about reality and how we should live our lives.

[Soul_of_Shu]

In the case of this psyche it began with a deep-seated curiosity about certain indelible paranormal/numinous experiences that materialism simply did not account for, and then serendipitously stumbling upon a Seth book mis-catalogued in the horror section of a used book store ~ a store appropriately enough named A Novel Idea ~ which initiated a long serpentine reading journey, leading eventually some 30 years later, after filling a 6'X6' bookshelf, to stumbling upon BK's ideas in More Than Allegory, and thus resonating with some version of idealism as a viable alternative, albeit a work in progress. So I suppose it has come to matter insofar as confirming the revelation that there really isn't any stuff of matter at all, therefore rendering those experiences as being somehow more understandable. Now it's mostly about refining, elaborating and collaborating on some explication of a metaphysics based in the primacy of consciousness as a viable counter-materialist alternative, and playing a role in this forum as a place where that might happen.

[AshvinP]

The comments seem to be peppered with quotes from really smart people saying really smart things. This causes me to ponder and ask "Why?". Does pursuing philosophical thought at this level of intensity give people's lives meaning where none existed before? Are all of these philosophers really any different than Jehovah's Witnesses attempting to convince you they have "it" figured out better than anyone else? Are the followers and enthusiasts people with too much time on their hands? I would love to see what other people think especially if they can express themselves without quoting someone else.

Let me add two more quotes to ponder:

“It has gradually become clear to me what every great philosophy up till now has consisted of – namely, the confession of its originator, and a species of involuntary and unconscious autobiography; and moreover that the moral (or immoral) purpose in every philosophy has constituted the true vital germ out of which the entire plant has always grown.”

"Every person is the unconscious exponent of some dead philosopher."

[Ed Konderla]

Damn! So what you are saying is I'm not the first to notice. And I thought I was being so original.

[Ed Konderla]

In the case of this psyche it began with a deep-seated curiosity about certain indelible paranormal/numinous experiences that materialism simply did not account for, and then serendipitously stumbling upon a Seth book mis-catalogued in the horror section of a used book store ~ a store appropriately enough named A Novel Idea ~ which initiated a long serpentine reading journey, leading eventually some 30 years later, after filling a 6'X6' bookshelf, to stumbling upon BK's ideas in More Than Allegory, and thus resonating with some version of idealism as a viable alternative, albeit a work in progress. So I suppose it has come to matter insofar as confirming the revelation that there really isn't any stuff of matter at all, therefore rendering those experiences as being somehow more understandable. Now it's mostly about refining, elaborating and collaborating on some explication of a metaphysics based in the primacy of consciousness as a viable counter-materialist alternative, and playing a role in this forum as a place where that might happen.

I am surprised how much I enjoy this. I to stumbled in an expat library in Saudi Arabia in 1988. I'm not a blogger or social media type. And I to find refinements to my understanding. I recently finished Decoding Jung. I had heard Jung's name all my life probably from some of general physics stuff I read and maybe other philosopher types. He was one of those smart people other smart people referenced. Sometimes I felt like they were name dropping. However I don't believe I had ever read a single thing by him. I found Bernardo's book interesting and entertaining and could definitely see his fingerprint on Bernardo's work. However the examination of the meaning of the fall in the appendix I found stunning and still kind of chew it over every few days when I have some quiet time.

[Lou Gold]

Ed,

Near the end of his life of teaching Krishnamurti was asked if his teaching had produced change? He responded, "Of course not!" Then asked, "So why did you teach?" he asked, "Why does the bird sing?"

I'm not surprised at your wife's finding it rather tedious. It does often sound like rather boyish banter, sort of a guy thing we do. Long ago I was told, "no mother at the forum."