Lost Ways of Knowing - John Vervaeke
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 тра 2023
- This is a brief presentation that pieces together several talks John has given about this model in an attempt to cover all the main arguments in one standalone video.
Here are the links to the talks used:
• John Vervaeke - How to...
• Best Synoptic Overview...
• My best recent talk.
• After Socrates: Episod...
What a great job you did here, sir. Thanks a lot for this.
This is helpful. thanks!
Glad to hear, Paul!
it's about 10 minutes to 1 AM where I'm at. And you made me think.
I have spent a year mostly reading material related to modern analytic philosophy. I guess I had some hope that somehow somewhere I will find a door that's just waiting to be opened. As Wittgenstein says at the end of his Tractatus, you climb a ladder, to find out the ladder is made of nonsense, which then you throw away. But you must climb it first to realize.
I've had a period where I firmly believed the entire substance of existence is completely contained in the propositional way of knowing things, I've never thought about these other categories of knowing things. I did learn how to bike when I was 26-27. Then I taught someone how to bike when I was 29. Language played a very small role in that entire experience indeed. I mean, I used language to convey the idea of biking and the principle behind the movements as such to hint at what kind of thing you should do with your body to remain "stable", but I could never teach someone how to bike with propositions alone.
I'm going to learn how to swim this summer, I wonder what that will do to my brain. I find that in general it's good for the brain, and your "soul" (whatever you may conceive that to be), to engage fully in all these different types of knowing things, they have a way of reinforcing one another, and they indeed are incomplete without one another. We cannot hope to get too far in any activity if we neglect certain parts of the human experience.
Thank you for assembling this, I will follow your progress closely.
Wow, thank you for sharing! This is exactly the intent of the video, glad it was useful! 🎉
This is such a great value add, thank you
Wow! A couple of days ago i was trying to find this in the lectures of Vervaeke, half remembering a lot of his work on UA-cam that I watched maybe a year or two ago, but I couldn't find it and I couldn't be donkeyed to rewatch the Awakening series over in it's entirety until I could piece it together again.
And now this video popped up in my feed and it's everything I was hoping to find and better!
This is gold! Thank you very much!
Glad to hear the algorithm is helping me out 😉
Thanks for the nice comment! ☺️
This video is fantastic,
the way you have put this together from various talks/lectures really fleshes each example
Keep up the great work.
I'd love to see you do the same for him talking about:
-kinds of Mindfulness, meditation and contemplation
-enlightenment
-narrative, normative, nomological orders
-relevance realisation
- intelligences, rationality, wisdoms
Thanks Antony 🙏
Brilliant recommendations! Those are definitely on the list!
Very good! Hope to see more :)
This is wonderful! Well done!
Thank you Ken! I'd love your input on more concepts that would suit a standalone video like this (in addition to what SantoAntonio has given below)
I'm definitely inspired to do one for the transcendentals based on that recent schematic. That's a thorny one though so I wanna do it justice...
Let me know if you have any ideas! 🙏
Wow this is amazing. This is so helpful for sharing with friends who are new to Vervaeke’s work
I've been watching vervaekes material for a few years, and this still gave me some insights even though in my hubris I thought I'd had it down :D the visuals help alot
Incredibly well done video. It aids wonderfuly those getting into Vervaeke's work. Keep it up!
Looking forward to more great videos, thank you for internalizing Vervarke.
Thank you! Great work!
Beautifully done. It puts the entire notion of ‘scientism’ in its rightful place as just another ‘propositional’ paradigm. Funny eh?
Excellent. I'm sharing this because I believe that understanding this is the first step to getting ourselves ready to properly engage with A.I. I do believe that the danger of A.I. is in our lack of wisdom.
Agreed! And thanks for the share! 🙏
Given the current comments, I’d suggest a companion piece that summarizes the truth/power/presence/belonging outcomes and how fundamental these are to agentic grounding. I hope you grok my meaning?
Great video! I´ve watched several hours of John talking and as a teacher I´ve been really interrested in the 4 ways of knowing. This is the first time I´ve seen his ideas about our ways of attaining knowledge collected and put together with both other important concepts. PS: wouldn´t a better title be 4 ways of knowing, the noe You are using frels misleading.
This is awesome! I see in a below comment you used obsidian to make the slides. That’s a great idea. I have about 500 pages of handwritten notes on my iPad that I’ve been wanting to transfer over to build a vault but haven’t got around to starting it yet. Great to see someone else doing this. And having it laid out in video format is very helpful for review of the info. I have a ton of diagrams for things mentioned throughout the series like sacredness, RR, religio, enlightenment, 8-fold path, as well as some historical maps of the figures mentioned similar to what you did with Descartes and Kant. I’d be happy to send these over to you if you’re interested. Are you planning on making more videos like these?
Yes, that would be amazing! My twitter is probably the best contact: (at)KompendiumProj
Hi, could i have acess to the diagrams that you developed?
Looking forward to diving in! What did you use to make the visuals?
Thaks for this gem!!!
Oh wow I've only just seen that you've made a video ❤
This is nice, do attempt to explains all your visuals in this way
Thanks, Kavein! I will indeed, keep an eye out!
Still finding this useful
What softwere did you used for slides? Obsidian with plugins?
Many of my static visuals are done in Obsidian's canvas, but this video was all Google slides!
It's not really scientific framework. But I think it can do the job as trening language.
If you don’t see this as a scientifically valid framework, you might be missing something. But you are right: it’s an exceptionally useful & valid starting point.
@@christopherhamilton3621 It would be more useful if you substanciate your claim about scientific validity instead of saying that I miss something. What standards this framework accomplish to consider it as scientific and not just philosophy? How you verify it?
Where does presuppositional values and psychology come in; and the lack of self awareness to avoid self deception come in?
In 70 years of living and observing; I have noticed that these can predict more about how people will vote; create values and meaning; and " create" what other groups to identify with; and which to look down on.
And the need to have some group to look down on seems to be a near universal value.
And I see a difference between many propositional ideas/ knowledge and semantical ideas/ knowledge.
And to me; a lot of the current cultural conflict is because many now want to change semantical knowledge to propositional or even presuppositional knowledge/ values.
( Pronouns and anything I don't agree with or like; or makes me look bad is fake news/facts. Even if it is on film.)
It’s not changing them but conflating & confusing them. Presuppositional things are almost entirely of the ‘propositional’ kind exactly because of legacy of privileging ‘propositional’ & ‘written knowledge’.
I would strongly suggest watching the last 3 minutes again, as the way these paradigms interact, align and integrate provide an enormously valuable insight into how they actually work in a cognitive and meta-cognitive context and in turn, show how Cognitive Science and Psychology fundamentally connect.
@@christopherhamilton3621 in my education a propositional fact or theory would be testable and disprovable over time.
A presupposition would be very hard to prove or make clearly falsifiable.