BK on Rebel Wisdom

[Soul_of_Shu]

Again, haven't actually watched this yet, and not really expecting much in the way of any significant departure from the usual Q&A, but at least reaching out to a significant subscriber base of 234k ...

[Ben Iscatus]

Short and sweet.

[Mark Tetzner]

Finally he´s at it again doing something useful....(ha ha).

With a rebel yell she cried more, more, more.
(Billy Idol)

[Lou Gold]

Again, haven't actually watched this yet, and not really expecting much in the way of any significant departure from the usual Q&A, but at least reaching out to a significant subscriber base of 234k ...

It's excellent an excellent podcast and the Q&A is valuable. I appreciate that BK tells Matt Segal that he doesn't comprehend Whitehead. Neither do I but something in me intuits that W is correct.

[AshvinP]

Again, haven't actually watched this yet, and not really expecting much in the way of any significant departure from the usual Q&A, but at least reaching out to a significant subscriber base of 234k ...

It's excellent an excellent podcast and the Q&A is valuable. I appreciate that BK tells Matt Segal that he doesn't comprehend Whitehead. Neither do I but something in me intuits that W is correct.

I have been interacting with Segal some on his discord server, and I can assure you he understands Whitehead better than BK. Matt has his own blind spots for sure, but he is more open-minded towards idealist thinkers like Steiner than BK is. That particular Q&A is very fascinating, because BK says Hegel and Whitehead are the two people he can't understand. No doubt both of them rely heavily on abstract intellectual formulations, but is it a coincidence that both seem to emphasize cognition as what fundamentally drives evolution? I doubt it. Actually, when we come to understand the fundamental significance of ideational activity in the world-evolving process, it becomes much easier to decipher all of these abstract philosophers and their conceptual systems. Many times they are referring directly to ideational activity with their concepts and sometimes they don't even realize it. This truly idea-list understanding serves as a Rosetta Stone for the abstract heiroglyphics of modern philosophy. I may need to write an essay on this soon if I find the time.

[AshvinP]

A great quote Segall posted on Twitter:

“When, following the invisible steps of thought, we come to inquire, Whence is matter? & Whereto? many truths arise to us out of the recesses of consciousness. We learn that spirit creates; that behind nature, throughout nature, spirit is present; one & not compound, it does not act upon us from without in space & time, but spiritually, or through ourselves: therefore, that spirit, the Supreme Being, does not build up nature around us, but puts it forth through us, as the life of the tree puts forth new branches & leaves through the pores of the old.”
-Ralph Waldo Emerson

[Lou Gold]

Again, haven't actually watched this yet, and not really expecting much in the way of any significant departure from the usual Q&A, but at least reaching out to a significant subscriber base of 234k ...

It's excellent an excellent podcast and the Q&A is valuable. I appreciate that BK tells Matt Segal that he doesn't comprehend Whitehead. Neither do I but something in me intuits that W is correct.

I have been interacting with Segal some on his discord server, and I can assure you he understands Whitehead better than BK. Matt has his own blind spots for sure, but he is more open-minded towards idealist thinkers like Steiner than BK is. That particular Q&A is very fascinating, because BK says Hegel and Whitehead are the two people he can't understand. No doubt both of them rely heavily on abstract intellectual formulations, but is it a coincidence that both seem to emphasize cognition as what fundamentally drives evolution? I doubt it. Actually, when we come to understand the fundamental significance of ideational activity in the world-evolving process, it becomes much easier to decipher all of these abstract philosophers and their conceptual systems. Many times they are referring directly to ideational activity with their concepts and sometimes they don't even realize it. This truly idea-list understanding serves as a Rosetta Stone for the abstract heiroglyphics of modern philosophy. I may need to write an essay on this soon if I find the time.

You may be correct, Ashvin, but the analysis is above my paygrade. All I can say is that for "naive me" Matt feels right.

[Lou Gold]

A great quote Segall posted on Twitter:

“When, following the invisible steps of thought, we come to inquire, Whence is matter? & Whereto? many truths arise to us out of the recesses of consciousness. We learn that spirit creates; that behind nature, throughout nature, spirit is present; one & not compound, it does not act upon us from without in space & time, but spiritually, or through ourselves: therefore, that spirit, the Supreme Being, does not build up nature around us, but puts it forth through us, as the life of the tree puts forth new branches & leaves through the pores of the old.”
-Ralph Waldo Emerson

Or, as my friend the Heitor Turrini, the Italian missionary who spent 57 years in the Amazon forest of Western Brazil, fighting for its people, plants and critters, puts it in less than a minute and a half ...