The problem is that Ashvinp won't just get a room with Kastrup, as much as I like some of his own philosophical musings. The thread OP was at least in part designated as being aimed at BK's framework specifically. It's my easy to dismiss and assumed understanding he doesn't want a broader forum of people coming in to learn all this stuff and to go through the motions of struggle necessitated by even grasping the foundations of this, so only those who are far on their journey already can discuss, or I can't tell since he talks in an incredibly spiritual way even when we're talking about something as simple as how best to handle a thread. It is this understanding that gets more and more difficult to ignore every week I lurk hereFederica wrote: ↑Mon May 30, 2022 11:52 pmI think that BK is sincerely trying to do just that: bringing his truth out there, to the secular world. He has quit academia as well as a top job to lead a foundation devoted to spreading the word of idealism outside of the closed circles of academia. He is touching a much larger public than one would expect from a philosopher. And the shift away from materialism today in and outside academia is tangible, especially in the younger generations.Cleric K wrote: ↑Mon May 30, 2022 9:27 pm And for how long should humanity keep strictly separated the world of academic thought and the world of Truth? Who are we serving by keeping these 'good manners' by not disturbing the secular world through the implications of the given facts?
This is also why simply trying to prove materialism wrong in itself, can never lead too far. That's way the Intelligent Design movement (renamed Creationists) fails. They present valuable observations about the inadequacy of evolution through purely random mutations but at the same time don't provide anything as a substitute, besides "God created everything."
Similarly, simply showing the inconsistencies of materialism, leaves one in void. Then they become susceptible to the worst kinds of superstitions. In other words, the materialist superstition (which sclerotized the ancient gods of the elements into laws of nature) is simply exchanged for another superstition - such as "there's MAL or whatever behind the disassociative curtains of inner reality."
That's why it is so urgent today that we not only show the inconstancies but also show how they can resolved (besides simply picking a blind belief of choice). And this resolution is to happen here and now, not by fantasizing and expecting it only after death but by growing into the full spectrum of reality.
Also, BK is not simply trying to prove materialism wrong in itself. That's unfair. He has developed a cohesive vision, inquired and connected evidence from physics, psychology, medicine to it.
Now, that his system has pitfalls, yes, and that another system is what the world urgently needs right now, ok maybe. But what does this bitterness stand for?
I admit it gets wearying seeing 'yeah i admit i have an ego and flaws and keep mentioning BK, sorry about that.. btw, here's more about BK'. It pretty much just resonates of astute disdain towards Kastrup especially when it is being used as an excuse to move into spaces where Kastrupian logic is explicitly and exclusively argued in pertinence to the foundation of the request. (in this case, the whirlpool) I struggle with mental issues and at least for now I think I'm ill disposed towards enlightenment as BK's brain frying analogy actually makes candid some of my own struggles in pervading higher cognition with the finesse purported here, so it's easy for me to wish Ash had my sense of self depreciation so he could graft it onto what reads as far less tumultuous cerebral framework in general. edit for clarity: I don't feel like I have much of a sense of self or even will to live most of the time, so I can't relate
So, I find how Cleric puts this particular brand of understanding into a cohesive language to be far more digestible and less alienating than Ashyp's approach even though both have many unique ideas (flat mal and the cascading layers being one) that have turned on it's head my own worldview. I'm afraid I'll get some reply on part with Star Trek technobabble if I propose the inquiry (welcomed if it's actually philosophy, this isn't) but you should make concrete what you want on this forum, what you don't, and then have the rest of us (perhaps even moderation) decide if those are tenable goals for open discussion. No philosophy, simple sentences, for that. It should be assumed people of a lower level of cognition should still be left to find their own tether given your own perusing of the fact that we must each make it alone, but if you do not want them here it would be sporting to make it plain so something could be thought (possibly done, but at least thought) of it. It probably comes in layers.
There have been jokes about talking to people like 'little children' here, but the fact of the matter is that children learn insidiously fast and adults made to take the same steps they do often can't progress so far even absent of the snares you say these steps become when they stop. An adult learning chess is *slow,* sometimes you must even take it slower than you would with a child. Anyone has to start somewhere, you will always look like a fool in the intervening years as you accrue a mastery.
This makes me wonder of if this forum has anything to do with kastrup? His name's in the domain, I assume it was at some point meant specifically for him
Another edit for clarity: AshvinP's posts are freaking cool and I love the poetic approach. It is just they come bagged with the same issue a fly buzzing around your food would give when a discussion might otherwise attract newcomers lured in by Kastrup's publicizing and who want to start finding their own tether in their own way before climbing to where they find some of Cleric K's fantastic graphs digestible. I am only trying to be candid, I am sure you could ascribe the same feeling to scrubs like me and anyone else into BK from your own point of view.