Why I believe Analytic Idealism is flawed

[Lou Gold]

I was thinking more of the Archetype creating the story, for example Jesus breathing love into his every step or Thich Nhat Hanh breathing peace into his and thereby demonstrating what others can do by acting mindfully (consciously).

This is important as it is the aspect that we can humanly relate to. But think also of the following. Our dream flow has many aspects and human conduct, although central to us, is still embedded within a wider context. So think of the first lines of Genesis. The Elohim go through the process which lays down the architecture of the dream flow. This is our Cosmic and planetary dream context which unfolds according to inner lawfulness which the Elohim macrocosmically Think. There's no doubt we should incorporate the human examples of Jesus and Thich Nhat Hanh into our personal story but do you conceive that this is not an end in itself but that it should bring us closer to living experience of the greater story, to understanding something of the inner life of the Elohim and how they art the dream architecture? And most importantly, do you see it as a necessity that we align our Earthly conduct with the Cosmic? Or what the Elohim do is their own business (even though we flow within their living dream-architecture) while we should simply stand on the 'user side' of the dream and enjoy the ride? Is it conceivable to you that maybe human affairs degenerate because we don't try to enter into living relations with the dream architects, such that we can work together and add constructively to the great work, instead of, because of our ignorance, at times working against the dream flow?

I see an interactive participatory flow, called communion in my tradition and (I believe) called interdependent co-arising in Buddhism.

[AshvinP]

Your use of the metaphor of water might be stronger based on the standard model of the hydrological cycle, which begins with condensation precipitating from above (higher realms).

You might also portray the essential humility as the integrated soil (humus) into which the doctrine or consciousness precipitates and grows plants which feedback their evolutionary development into higher realms in a continuous process of interdependent co-arising.

In such a model (or metaphor or story), intellectual lingo might be associated with the corporeal soil-planting, fruit-bearing, life-giving phase of the cycle.

As Cleric mentioned before, and as I also tried to convey, it isn't about making models or telling stories, but consciously entering into the model-making and story-telling process. As long as we conceive these things as mere metaphors, we are not penetrating to the ideal depths of the lessons Water can give to us. I am sure you are aware of the magical rites involving water which cultures have used for many millennia. More recently, we see the priests blessing the water and the baptism by water. Do we feel these ideal intentions actually influence the water and its properties of renewal and healing, or is it a mere metaphor? If the former, then it's easy to see why the intentions, informed by higher knowledge, are so critical. Then the stakes in the world of ideas become real for us, not only an intellectual game. If you bless the water for a "continuous process of interdependent co-arising", and someone else blesses it for a "standstill of mutually exclusive co-expiring", then has anything actually been accomplished? Are these both blessings we should seek to manifest in our story?

[Lou Gold]

Your use of the metaphor of water might be stronger based on the standard model of the hydrological cycle, which begins with condensation precipitating from above (higher realms).

You might also portray the essential humility as the integrated soil (humus) into which the doctrine or consciousness precipitates and grows plants which feedback their evolutionary development into higher realms in a continuous process of interdependent co-arising.

In such a model (or metaphor or story), intellectual lingo might be associated with the corporeal soil-planting, fruit-bearing, life-giving phase of the cycle.

As Cleric mentioned before, and as I also tried to convey, it isn't about making models or telling stories, but consciously entering into the model-making and story-telling process. As long as we conceive these things as mere metaphors, we are not penetrating to the ideal depths of the lessons Water can give to us. I am sure you are aware of the magical rites involving water which cultures have used for many millennia. More recently, we see the priests blessing the water and the baptism by water. Do we feel these ideal intentions actually influence the water and its properties of renewal and healing, or is it a mere metaphor? If the former, then it's easy to see why the intentions, informed by higher knowledge, are so critical. Then the stakes in the world of ideas become real for us, not only an intellectual game. If you bless the water for a "continuous process of interdependent co-arising", and someone else blesses it for a "standstill of mutually exclusive co-expiring", then has anything actually been accomplished? Are these both blessings we should seek to manifest in our story?

Ashvin,

This is feeling weird to me. You presented an "analogy" concerning the mediating value of the intellect and I offered a way to improve it as an analogy.

"It is very useful to understand the intellect as a mediator between the spiritual and physical worlds. Let's consider an analogy to water. ..."

And I wasn't challenging the meaning of sacred rites, following protocols exactly as received from spirit. There are precise rules for this. And, more generally, there is active participation with the archetypes in process of rebuilding, renewing, restoring, replanting the sacred world.

[AshvinP]

Your use of the metaphor of water might be stronger based on the standard model of the hydrological cycle, which begins with condensation precipitating from above (higher realms).

You might also portray the essential humility as the integrated soil (humus) into which the doctrine or consciousness precipitates and grows plants which feedback their evolutionary development into higher realms in a continuous process of interdependent co-arising.

In such a model (or metaphor or story), intellectual lingo might be associated with the corporeal soil-planting, fruit-bearing, life-giving phase of the cycle.

As Cleric mentioned before, and as I also tried to convey, it isn't about making models or telling stories, but consciously entering into the model-making and story-telling process. As long as we conceive these things as mere metaphors, we are not penetrating to the ideal depths of the lessons Water can give to us. I am sure you are aware of the magical rites involving water which cultures have used for many millennia. More recently, we see the priests blessing the water and the baptism by water. Do we feel these ideal intentions actually influence the water and its properties of renewal and healing, or is it a mere metaphor? If the former, then it's easy to see why the intentions, informed by higher knowledge, are so critical. Then the stakes in the world of ideas become real for us, not only an intellectual game. If you bless the water for a "continuous process of interdependent co-arising", and someone else blesses it for a "standstill of mutually exclusive co-expiring", then has anything actually been accomplished? Are these both blessings we should seek to manifest in our story?

Ashvin,

This is feeling weird to me. You presented an "analogy" concerning the mediating value of the intellect and I offered a way to improve it as an analogy.

"It is very useful to understand the intellect as a mediator between the spiritual and physical worlds. Let's consider an analogy to water. ..."

And I wasn't challenging the meaning of sacred rites, following protocols exactly as received from spirit. There are precise rules for this. And, more generally, there is active participation with the archetypes in process of rebuilding, renewing, restoring, replanting the sacred world.

But you keep avoiding the question, Lou, the point which lies at the foundation of the analogy. What is the role of our own ideations and knowledge in redeeming the profane and renewing the sacred? We criticize BK and modern analytic philosophy-religion-science generally, because it treats the world of ideas as toys to play with in the sandbox - there are no stakes to what we think and what we know. A person can hold idea "X" or idea "anti-X" and it wouldn't make one iota of practical difference in their lives moving from one to the other. They may as well be flipping a coin to decide. You often jump in to say, "well BK has his model/story and you have yours, and there is room for us to appreciate both of them equally". We say, this is exactly another manifestation of the thing we are criticizing - the view which treats the world of ideas as purely intellectual models with no stakes. Cleric gives the analogy to what we eat in the physical world, and the response is, "interactive participatory flow". What does this mean to you? How does it relate to the process of discriminating between ideas and knowledge?

[Lou Gold]

As Cleric mentioned before, and as I also tried to convey, it isn't about making models or telling stories, but consciously entering into the model-making and story-telling process. As long as we conceive these things as mere metaphors, we are not penetrating to the ideal depths of the lessons Water can give to us. I am sure you are aware of the magical rites involving water which cultures have used for many millennia. More recently, we see the priests blessing the water and the baptism by water. Do we feel these ideal intentions actually influence the water and its properties of renewal and healing, or is it a mere metaphor? If the former, then it's easy to see why the intentions, informed by higher knowledge, are so critical. Then the stakes in the world of ideas become real for us, not only an intellectual game. If you bless the water for a "continuous process of interdependent co-arising", and someone else blesses it for a "standstill of mutually exclusive co-expiring", then has anything actually been accomplished? Are these both blessings we should seek to manifest in our story?

Ashvin,

This is feeling weird to me. You presented an "analogy" concerning the mediating value of the intellect and I offered a way to improve it as an analogy.

"It is very useful to understand the intellect as a mediator between the spiritual and physical worlds. Let's consider an analogy to water. ..."

And I wasn't challenging the meaning of sacred rites, following protocols exactly as received from spirit. There are precise rules for this. And, more generally, there is active participation with the archetypes in process of rebuilding, renewing, restoring, replanting the sacred world.

But you keep avoiding the question, Lou, the point which lies at the foundation of the analogy. What is the role of our own ideations and knowledge in redeeming the profane and renewing the sacred? We criticize BK and modern analytic philosophy-religion-science generally, because it treats the world of ideas as toys to play with in the sandbox - there are no stakes to what we think and what we know. A person can hold idea "X" or idea "anti-X" and it wouldn't make one iota of practical difference in their lives moving from one to the other. They may as well be flipping a coin to decide. You often jump in to say, "well BK has his model/story and you have yours, and there is room for us to appreciate both of them equally". We say, this is exactly another manifestation of the thing we are criticizing - the view which treats the world of ideas as purely intellectual models with no stakes. Cleric gives the analogy to what we eat in the physical world, and the response is, "interactive participatory flow". What does this mean to you? How does it relate to the process of discriminating between ideas and knowledge?

Let me be simple in response.

"What is the role of our own ideations and knowledge in redeeming the profane and renewing the sacred?"

If we believe that mountains are sacred, we would not do mountaintop removal coal mining.

"You often jump in to say, "well BK has his model/story and you have yours, and there is room for us to appreciate both of them equally".

Not so. I say that there's room to appreciate them "differently." I am not a devotee of Analytic Idealialism. I do see value in that it makes an intellectual argument that is more plausible than physicalism and opens a door in our dominant secular culture to the spiritual. I do think AI is limited and flawed in its inability to go deeper. BK never claims to offer spiritual teaching and he confesses his own uncertainties and anxieties. For the spiritual he most often turns to Spira.

"Cleric gives the analogy to what we eat in the physical world, and the response is, "interactive participatory flow". What does this mean to you? How does it relate to the process of discriminating between ideas and knowledge?"

Believe poison is good and get sick. The "interactive participatory flow" produces palpable observable results.

[Lou Gold]

"Intuitive thinking begins with the humble realization that in our spiritual activity we've never been apart from the archetypal world."

Cleric,

I like your bolded statement and I've been contemplating it...

"Intuitive thinking begins with the humble realization that in our spiritual activity we've never been apart from the archetypal world."

It strikes me that, if this is true (and I think it is), then why do we need a story or model or representation to explain it? Why not just live it and breathe it into every move we make? Might this be the secret of why engaged mindfulness has become so popular and so able to spread across the boundaries created by identifying with different stories?

How might this work in practice? The life and work of Thich Nhat Hanh offers a model of the process in action. Please note that I'm not a Buddhist so I'm not arguing for "my way". I'm a Judeo-Christian-shamanic-eclectic and quite identified with telling stories, so this perception is not born of confirmation bias. What do you think of it?

Hi Lou,

let's first look at what a 'story' really is. Your life is a story, isn't it? This story would be non-existent in consciousness if there wasn't the mystery of memory. After all, if our existence consisted of disconnected frames, without memory building up, there could be no story, right? Our story is something much more than the logistic history of a lump of meat on its way from breeding to the slaughterhouse. What we remember is the inner states of thinking, feeling, willing and perception. These form a stream of metamorphosis which leads to our current state. Seen in this way, our story is not simply a list of dry facts but actual inner experience of continual transformation. Our past is not simply things that have happened to us but the temporal unfolding of our bodily nature, understandings, goals, aspirations, dreams. So even though we conceive of the past as something that has gone away from us, from another perspective we can see it as if the past has grown into us. What we are now is what the metamorphosis process has grown into. Similarly, the beautiful blossoms that you often send, do not exist in isolation but they are what the whole plant has been metamorphosing towards. I've tried to present this different way of thinking about memory here.

I'll return to the story but let's look at the second question first: "Why not just live it and breathe it into every move we make?" Everyone is doing this even if they don't know it. The thing is that this world of potential is differentiated, there are various currents, winds, seasons. It is through our spiritual activity that we align with one or another. We have talked a lot about this before. Everyone of us works under a specific constellation of the archetypal forces. You suggest to simply breathe the potential and ask no questions. But this is also what the colonialist does. This is what the technocrat does. In their inner world they live and breath a very specific constellation of archetypal ideas. They see the Earth as the arena where these ideas can be manifested.

Yet you find the way of the 'younger brother' disagreeable. This in itself should be the living indication that it is not enough to simply breathe and live the potential whatever that might be. In a similar way we don't just swallow anything we get our hands on. We use discrimination. We understand the benefits or dangers of the various things we ingest. It's exactly the same in our inner world. We live in world of spiritual 'foodstuff' - ideas, desires. We need certain way to distinguish the qualities of these foods and ingest in our soul only those which align with our high ideal. What this high ideal is, is something that everyone should determine for themselves in complete freedom. If our ideal is Love, brotherhood, harmonious unfoldment of our shared dream, them we'll seek the ideas, feelings and actions that resonate with these archetypal forces. If our ideal is to feel as a sole dictator over the Earthly kingdom, then we'll seek the forces that align with it.

Of course, seeking to become a conductor for our high ideal requires knowledge, wisdom. We're in constant interaction with a living reality, which is not simply random noise but exhibits certain rhythmic lawfulness. We need to know when to sow the plants and when to harvest them. If we ignore the seasonal rhythms it's not Nature's fault that we're left hungry. And this brings us back to the need of a story.

As said, the story is not simply a dry narrative to satisfy our intellectual curiosity by filling some gaps. The crucial thing is that the story should be the temporal dimension of the living being that we are. Imagine that someone says to you: "Your life story is irrelevant. It is just an intellectual fairy tale to boost your ego. It's all the same what narrative you attach to your persona. The important thing is here and now." While it's true that the story should in no way be used as a booster for the ego, it is simply not true that the story is unimportant.

Our life circumstances in the here and now only make sense when they are seen as the blossom of continual metamorphosis. If the life processes have been different, if our past ideals were different, our blossom today could have different color, different fragrance or maybe it would be shriveled, eaten away by bugs. It's nonsensical to say that only the here and now matters (I'm not speaking of the deeper truth that ultimately all eternity exists in the now but about ignoring the temporal thickness of the now). If till yesterday I've been only eating, drinking, smoking, fornicating, stealing, lying and today I decide to start clean, is it enough to say "All that matters is the here and now"? What about the all the toxins that have accumulated and ruined my body? What about all the damage I've done to those around me? All the memory images that continue to haunt me? All the addictive habits?

While it is true that our innermost essential being is none of these things, they are our living environment now and we have to live with them. If we want a better environment it's of no use to close our eyes and fantasize that our body is healthy, that our heart is pure and all the damage to the world is non-existent. The only reasonable thing is to make all these things our high ideal and from now on begin to direct all our thinking, feelings and actions in alignment with it. If we do this, then in future time, when we look upon the blossom here and now, we'll see that it is what it is because we've been slowly and wisely nourishing it.

But as said, simply yearning for something is not enough. This primes our thoughts and feelings but in order for all this to reach the domain of will, of actions, of deeper transformation of the dream, we need also skills, we need understanding of the rhythmic laws of the dreamscape. And this is where we return to the importance of the story. Through the story we can encompass the rhythmic laws that extend in time. There's no music in the infinitesimal thin now. Our consciousness should spread in time if we are to grasp rhythm, melody, song structure. If we focus only on the here and now, we're like a leaf blown by the winds. We don't know from whence we come and where we're going. We assume that as long as we live and breath the inexplicable life stream it is all good. But doesn't the drunkard do the same thing? Doesn't he live for the sip here and now, living and breathing the moment, without thought about where he comes from and where he's going?

It is for this reason that the story is something much more than prose to make our mind feel more gapless. When we understand the story in its inner essence, our being consciously expands into the temporal structure of the dreamscape we call reality. This is also why it is not enough to know only our personal story. Our personal story is embedded in the story of the Cosmic organism. Our blossom is not independent of the soil, water, air, sunlight. The story of the ancient Hebrews didn't aim to boost their egos and simply make them feel chosen by God above all other tribes. The story of the OT is not simply a historical account but the inner metamorphosis of the spiritual being of humanity. It shouldn't be taken neither as a dry list of names and events, nor as a bed time myth for the children. Today we're in position to find that story within ourselves, as the organic structure of our time being, which goes much further than our present lifetime.

There are only two main and intertwined thoughts in all the above:
1/ The soul and spiritual world that we live and breath and continually precipitates as perception/memory, contains forces of the most varied kinds. It is up to our freedom to determine what our ideal for becoming is and seek to manifest the corresponding forces.
2/ We can't manifest these forces when we have consciousness only of the the indeterminate now. Or rather, we can manifest many things but we have no clue how these forces will play out in time. That's why we need also consciousness which encompasses time - we also need the story. Not as dry sum of historical facts imparted onto us but as living understanding of the forces of soul and spirit which govern the lawful unfolding of the dreamscape. Put in other words, the story is our living understanding of the Cosmic forces that art the structure of the dream, just like the on-the-surface story of our life is the living understanding of our own thinking, feeling and willing and the way they have unfolded in time and have led us to where we are now.

After contemplating it my conclusion is that the story is the archetype and that breathing it into the now is not indeterminate but multidimensional and interdependent. Bottom line is that the story generates awareness. We may differ on the particular details of the story but I believe we end up as both seeing the story as essential.