Bernardo vs Graham Oppy!!

[findingblanks]

"All evil is untimely good".

Ashvin attributed this to Steiner. Sometimes our moderator gets "upset"/stern when some people don't give the exact lecture and the exact quote. I'm fine with what Ashvin said and don't demand he source it exactly, but I personally would love to see the text if that is a direct quote.

Steiner did make that point quiet a bit. In my recollection he would almost always point out that it was a very old piece of wisdom found in various traditions. Steiner was often very generous in making sure he didn't get credit for ancient ideas. Yes, a very lovely way of remembering the inherent balancing act that is life. Since much of this is new to Ashvin, my suspicion is that for Ashvin Steiner was the first person who made this general point about evil being an imbalance that is necessary for rebalance. Supposedly, 88% of us agree that it is an important idea and an even more important experience.

[AshvinP]

"All evil is untimely good".

Ashvin attributed this to Steiner. Sometimes our moderator gets "upset"/stern when some people don't give the exact lecture and the exact quote. I'm fine with what Ashvin said and don't demand he source it exactly, but I personally would love to see the text if that is a direct quote.

Steiner did make that point quiet a bit. In my recollection he would almost always point out that it was a very old piece of wisdom found in various traditions. Steiner was often very generous in making sure he didn't get credit for ancient ideas. Yes, a very lovely way of remembering the inherent balancing act that is life. Since much of this is new to Ashvin, my suspicion is that for Ashvin Steiner was the first person who made this general point about evil being an imbalance that is necessary for rebalance. Supposedly, 88% of us agree that it is an important idea and an even more important experience.

Here:

The deep and profound thought here contained is the following: the darkness must be overcome through the Kingdom of Light, through the mingling of the Good with the Evil, in order that the Evil may be redeemed, but not through punishment. The conception underlying this is also that of Theosophy, namely that Evil is only an untimely Good. For example, an excellent piano technique is good, but if the executant wanted to hammer it out on the piano in the concert hall, there it would be evil. That which without any doubt is evil today must have been, in its own time proper place, good.

Obviously Steiner did not invent the ideal meaning. That can only be concluded from the atomized egoic perspective which feels ideas are "invented" by personal agencies. Maybe he wasn't the first to express that shared ideation with that combination of word-symbols either... Lou asked me where I sourced it from and I told him with no unnecessary psycho-cryptology involved

I think your bold interpretation only holds from the fragmented physical perspective (which is generally what I live with most of the time now as well). From the higher spiritual perspective, we could say there is no such thing as untimely imbalance (evil). As our Time-consciousness expands to encompass more and more of the interwoven spiritual relations, what formerly appeared as an imbalance is actually perceived to be a balance (good), although we may have to penetrate through several alternating 'layers' of imbalance-balance. That is the sublime beauty of our spiritual activity - it can lift us up to perceive a perspective higher than its own current one, which discerns the Unity in the multiplicty. That is how ever-evolving spiritual beings progressively redeem the "evil" from their fragmented state.

[Lou Gold]

"All evil is untimely good".

Ashvin attributed this to Steiner. Sometimes our moderator gets "upset"/stern when some people don't give the exact lecture and the exact quote. I'm fine with what Ashvin said and don't demand he source it exactly, but I personally would love to see the text if that is a direct quote.

Steiner did make that point quiet a bit. In my recollection he would almost always point out that it was a very old piece of wisdom found in various traditions. Steiner was often very generous in making sure he didn't get credit for ancient ideas. Yes, a very lovely way of remembering the inherent balancing act that is life. Since much of this is new to Ashvin, my suspicion is that for Ashvin Steiner was the first person who made this general point about evil being an imbalance that is necessary for rebalance. Supposedly, 88% of us agree that it is an important idea and an even more important experience.

Here:

The deep and profound thought here contained is the following: the darkness must be overcome through the Kingdom of Light, through the mingling of the Good with the Evil, in order that the Evil may be redeemed, but not through punishment. The conception underlying this is also that of Theosophy, namely that Evil is only an untimely Good. For example, an excellent piano technique is good, but if the executant wanted to hammer it out on the piano in the concert hall, there it would be evil. That which without any doubt is evil today must have been, in its own time proper place, good.

Obviously Steiner did not invent the ideal meaning. That can only be concluded from the atomized egoic perspective which feels ideas are "invented" by personal agencies. Maybe he wasn't the first to express that shared ideation with that combination of word-symbols either... Lou asked me where I sourced it from and I told him with no unnecessary psycho-cryptology involved

I think your bold interpretation only holds from the fragmented physical perspective (which is generally what I live with most of the time now as well). From the higher spiritual perspective, we could say there is no such thing as untimely imbalance (evil). As our Time-consciousness expands to encompass more and more of the interwoven spiritual relations, what formerly appeared as an imbalance is actually perceived to be a balance (good), although we may have to penetrate through several alternating 'layers' of imbalance-balance. That is the sublime beauty of our spiritual activity - it can lift us up to perceive a perspective higher than its own current one, which discerns the Unity in the multiplicity. That is how ever-evolving spiritual beings progressively redeem the "evil" from their fragmented state.

The quote made me think of:

Ecclesiastes 3: To every thing there is a season, A time for every purpose under the heaven, etc.

and of:

LIVE<>EVIL

[Soul_of_Shu]

"All evil is untimely good".

Ashvin attributed this to Steiner. Sometimes our moderator gets "upset"/stern when some people don't give the exact lecture and the exact quote.

Do you see me as your admonishing, stern and upset daddy? Want to lay down on the couch and tell me about that?

I've only just suggested that when one makes a claim that a certain figure being discussed here, e.g. Steiner, Kastrup, or whoever, has stated such-and-such, and wants it not to be dismissed as misinterpretation, exaggeration, or outright fabrication, then best source the statement so that it can be assessed accordingly.

[Soul_of_Shu]

Dr. Shu, JW is trolling in the comment-section of the video as well. He says they are "two mediocre people".
I think he is watching BK all day or something. I am wondering where he is coming from when he thinks
he is the only one with substance.

Dare I say he's coming from the perspective of fallibility, you know, like the rest of us

[Mark Tetzner]

What does fallability mean in this context?

[Ben Iscatus]

What does fallability mean in this context?

It means you fall down a lot. It's a hierarchical thing. You start up high, you gradually lose height, then you hit rock bottom. Like this joke...

[Soul_of_Shu]

What does fallability mean in this context?

In this case it would mean that JW asserts that he's not resorting to abstractions, as he claims BK does when positing a state of transpersonal Mind to which personal minds are reducible, while not seeing his own blindspot in that regard, when he claims to avoid such abstractions by not reducing reality beyond the most basic phenomena that can measured and quantified, while giving no account of how to get from there to consciousness. In other words, beyond that point there is just some unfathomable mystery of Being about which we should not speak, neither to say it is aware or non-aware Being. But when asked how such Being is not also a thought-up abstraction, has no good answer that I've heard.

[Soul_of_Shu]

What does fallability mean in this context?

It means you fall down a lot. It's a hierarchical thing. You start up high, you gradually lose height, then you hit rock bottom. Like this joke...

And alas, the older and more frail this bodily costume gets the more able, and likely, it is to fall down. Mind you, that can be taken in another context, in that it is also falling down like a veil, to reveal its ever-present Origin.

But I won't deign to tease Mark about his english spelling, considering that at least he's attempting to be fluent in a language not native to him, which is more than I can claim.

[Mark Tetzner]

There is nothing wrong with my english spelling and I consider myself a Lichtgestalt
Ok I get it, fallibility
Thanks for answering.
But you are right. I dont want to harp away on JW but overall it was disappointing.
This huge confidence-show and then what?, I am wondering.
Again my question from before if anyone has time:
What is in his opinion the big advantage one has when NOT being an analytical philosopher?
When rejecting arguments from psychedelics and personal aquaintance at the same time,
what is his unique advantage except being somewhat able to quote Hoelderlin-poems??
My english could be a lot better if I tried, but often I am a bit rushed.

JW was interesting in many ways, his knowledge about german philosophers is impressive,
though his love-affair with them, being american, was the coolest part about it.
Even the Germans leaving amazon-reviews are wiping the sweat of their brows when
reading them, so he has this old-fashioned air about him which I found at least quite likeable.
The way he sells himself with god knows what he thinks he brings to the table I found less
likeable. He isnt even a figure of light......like myself.....ahh.....