Greer post on philosophy

[AshvinP]

Well that didn't take long... JMG refused to post my second response to him or to another person explaining the "evolution of consciousness", which wasn't even critiquing JMG directly. Then he responds to me "offlist". Looks like there are no reasonable or open minds left, unfortunately.

JMG: "Awakening (offlist), perhaps you can save your lectures about who’s misunderstood what until I start posting about Steiner. I don’t normally permit people to hijack the comment thread with teal-deer diatribes about their hobby horses, you know, and my comment about Steiner was a passing reference. We’ll get to him in due time."

He also made a comment saying he will discuss Steiner's "achievements and failures" next year, which suggests he is going to skip right over PoF and Steiner's detailed critiques of critical idealism i.e. Kant-Schop.

[dkpstarkey]

JMG states that Steiner "tried to prove that thinking really could grasp the objective truth about the world." Is that a reasonably correct statement?

[AshvinP]

JMG states that Steiner "tried to prove that thinking really could grasp the objective truth about the world." Is that a reasonably correct statement?

No, because JMG means it in a dualistic way. We should really internalize the notion of "co-creating" the world through Thinking. As Cleric wrote previously, the obssession with "proving" things about the world with our thinking only makes sense under modern age dualism. Once we shift to a consistently monistic perspective, where Thinking is a sense-organ which perceives ideal content in the world, then it makes no sense to talk about "proving" or "grasping" objective truth about the world with thinking. It only makes sense to say Thinking (intellectual reasoning and higher) is perceiving a more or less harmonious image of the world content. In others words, there is no objective world without Thinking. I know this is the most difficult thing to internalize after we have been ingrained with the "view from nowhere". JMG would likely say "I explicitly reject the 'view from nowhere'! It is the source of so many modern misunderstandings!", but the hardest thing is to recognize this view functioning within one's own thinking. The reason why is summed up by this quote:

“If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?”
― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago

"Evil" here is a perpetual fragmentation of the world content into subject/object, not just in theory, but in our concrete approach to the world content. Someone like JMG, who practically feels he has intellectually understood everything from ancient spirituality to modern philosophy-science, politics, and everything in between (which I have gleaned from previously following his blog and reading some of his books), will resist with all his might to confront the fragmenting evil in his own heart. This is really powerful stuff we are talking about here, and I am coming to realize more and more how egrigiously underestimated it is (by the very same intellect that is being challenged with it). It is practically the one thing people won't give up when they have given up everything else for the sake of Goodness, Beauty, and Truth. They actively ignore it within themselves. Really there is nothing we can write to "convince" people this is working within them, only hope that something we write, perhaps unintentionally, sparks off an inspiration which leads them to discover it on their own.

[Ben Iscatus]

JMG's distrust of "linear" probably relates to his firm belief in cycles of history and civilisation (rise and fall - after Toynbee) and his consequent distrust of the modern Western myth of progress (contrast also: Thoreau's "Walden" and "Civil Disobedience"). Rudolf Steiner is obviously a firm believer in progress.

[AshvinP]

JMG's distrust of "linear" probably relates to his firm belief in cycles of history and civilisation (rise and fall - after Toynbee) and his consequent distrust of the modern Western myth of progress (contrast also: Thoreau's "Walden" and "Civil Disobedience"). Rudolf Steiner is obviously a firm believer in progress.

This is what I mean. Everyone believes they understand Steiner but they don't, and their own misunderstanding is of the sort which ensures they never will. Unless they actually read what we are writing with good will and without prejudice. Cleric has outlined a million different ways why Thinking as concrete spiritual activity should be taken seriously, in ways that don't rely on Steiner's PoF at all. JMG censors my comment, which I posted here and is very polite, where I try to elaborate on why he is misunderstanding PoF, because his ego feels threatened. So now he will go on to write articles that 100% misrepresent Steiner's epistemic argument. He probably feels PoF is too "progressive" in the same sense you do.

Steiner is more 'apocalyptic' than Greer and company in terms of the immediate threats ahead of modern civilization. Tonybee, Spengler, etc. are somewhat optimistic about Western civilization compared to Steiner. Why do you think Cleric and myself keep writing here that it is urgently needed for people to awaken to the spiritual? The only difference is, Steiner sees a light at the far end of the tunnel for what's left of humanity (which is actually Greer's position too, as far as I remember), and for each individual who chooses to sow the seeds of their spiritual evolution in this lifetime, by way of good will, hard effort, and persistence. Our current incarnation is not our only one and evolution really takes place between death and rebirth, but how we thoughtfully approach life matters greatly.

The last part will never be understood until one understands the participatory co-creative role of their own Thinking activity in the Cosmic evolutionary process. But I get the sense that people feel acknowledging its role to themselves is "too optimistic". They feel subconsciously guilty for their idolatry and, therefore, that they are undeserving of any deeper spiritual meaning through Thinking. But, as we keep saying here, making the subconscious guilt conscious via Self-knowledge is what metamorphoses it from a nagging irritation which obstructs spiritual evolution into a positive motivation which instructs spiritual evolution. It's not about getting rid of any of these deeper experiences, but about transfiguring them into their higher essences.

[Soul_of_Shu]

JMG censors my comment, which I posted here and is very polite, where I try to elaborate on why he is misunderstanding PoF, because his ego feels threatened.

Regardless of how polite one may be in pointing out to some well-regarded intellectual like Greer how their egoic fragility and fallibility is undermining the clarity and consistency of their thinking process, why would one expect that, due to that very same egoic fragility and fallibility, it would not be taken as an impolite slur? One of those 'catch 22' dilemmas, no?

[Ben Iscatus]

He probably feels PoF is too "progressive" in the same sense you do.

I don't have an opinion here - I'm just trying to explain how I understand JMG's psychology.

why would one expect that, due to that very same egoic fragility and fallibility, it would not be taken as an impolite slur? One of those 'catch 22' dilemmas, no?

Nietzsche: “The ego – our last article of faith.” Hard to avoid!

[Soul_of_Shu]

Given the very long list of comments following Greer's article, and his mostly brief off-the-cuff replies, which I just spent a good hour scrolling through, EcoSophia surely could use a proper discussion forum format within which to house that commentary, allowing for much more thorough and far less disjointed interaction. Of course, if Greer is the moderator, it appears many of us, this mod included, would be banned fairly quickly

[dkpstarkey]

JMG states that Steiner "tried to prove that thinking really could grasp the objective truth about the world." Is that a reasonably correct statement?

No, because JMG means it in a dualistic way. We should really internalize the notion of "co-creating" the world through Thinking. As Cleric wrote previously, the obssession with "proving" things about the world with our thinking only makes sense under modern age dualism. Once we shift to a consistently monistic perspective, where Thinking is a sense-organ which perceives ideal content in the world, then it makes no sense to talk about "proving" or "grasping" objective truth about the world with thinking.
...Really there is nothing we can write to "convince" people this is working within them, only hope that something we write, perhaps unintentionally, sparks off an inspiration which leads them to discover it on their own.

Ashvin, thanks for the clarification. I admire your rhetorical skills and I accept many of your arguments. I hope you won't find it offensive, but I feel that you could encourage others to be more receptive to your ideas by reducing your own level of impatience and prickliness. And your byline about freedom seems a bit arrogant, does it not? Right off the bat, you're putting your audience on the defensive. That seems unhelpful. I hope this message will be received in the spirit it is offered, with respect.

Kyle

[Soul_of_Shu]

JMG censors my comment, which I posted here and is very polite, where I try to elaborate on why he is misunderstanding PoF, because his ego feels threatened.

Regardless of how polite one may be in pointing out to some well-regarded intellectual like Greer how their egoic fragility and fallibility is undermining the clarity and consistency of their thinking process, why would one expect that, due to that very same egoic fragility and fallibility, it would not be taken as an impolite slur? One of those 'catch 22' dilemmas, no?

Further to the 'censoring' issue, this Ecosophia blog post on that topic by JMG seems a tad perplexing, given his axing of his exchange with Ashvin.