The Future World - A Conversation between John Vervaeke and Àlex Gómez-Marín
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 лют 2025
- A Conversation between John Vervaeke and Àlex Gómez-Marín
Àlex Gómez-Marin curates and hosts conversations to address The Future World, seeking to gain clarity and insight into important contemporary matters that require both urgent action as well as deep reflection.
Dr. John Vervaeke, an award-winning professor of psychology, cognitive science, and Buddhist psychology at the University of Toronto, brings a wealth of academic expertise to his courses. With a Ph.D. in Philosophy from the University of Toronto, Dr. Vervaeke served as the former Director of Cognitive Science and holds the position of Associate Professor in the Department of Psychology. He has won and been nominated for several teaching awards and has published articles on relevance realization, general intelligence, mindfulness, flow, metaphor, and wisdom. With expertise in both Eastern and Western philosophy, Dr. Vervaeke guides learners through a transformative journey, integrating ancient wisdom with modern scientific insights. Dr. Vervaeke’s courses are a captivating blend of theoretical knowledge and practical wisdom, and his dynamic teaching style engages students in exploring the depths of the mind and its implications for personal growth and societal change, illuminating the path to a deeper understanding of oneself and the world.
Recorded on January 15, 2025.
Si Alex no tiene cuidado no va caber en su despacho, excelente espacio y muy interesante debate. Me encanta contar con este espacio alternativo, abierto y flexible al conocimiento
Lovely to see both of you together. Excellent, timely exploration.
I believe this is why aspects of Psychoanalysis are so meaningful. As its exploring consciousness through very fine gradients, but its also a ritual that takes place in the context of another human being (relatedness).
This was a brilliant discussion. Thank you 🙏
Another great conversation Pari y J. Verbally! et. al. ¡Gracious! Mi gusto mucho
Wow. Extraordinary answers and articulations.
Vervaeke's Hierarchy of Needs. Thanks, good stuff! Buddhist here. No isms that do harm are unskillful isms. We've been here before, we'll be here again (possibly)...our inventions don't change the general narrative through line too terribly much. The eightfold path is pretty clear about discernment. Vipassana is wholly embodied. My mind is BS and I'm a happy moron. I sit every day. I won't impose my practice on you.🙏
Enjoyed. Than you. Just can’t help sensing that the ‘ism’ talk focused on specific persons can bring the self importance subject to the table in a not profitable way.
Pari centers on a roll! Let’s go
It seems to me that the path to a global platform for collective terrestrial intelligence, CTI, is the ability to merge, deduplicate, fact check, and aggregate the knowledge and sentiment expressed in public conversations with billions of people around the world. How to make the platform as open source, decentralized, and privacy protecting as possible?
Volume is a bit low on the recording
25:30 #MetaCrisis, #Policrisis & #MeaningCrisis ... energy, environment, politics, migration ... amplifying affects ... danger of a runaway effect ...
I know this sounds crazy. I acknowledge that. But anthroposophy and spiritual science is the answer to all of these questions. I will make a video and write a response to this. Fantastic conversation.
I wonder how different Neoplatonism and (modern) Idealism really are? I sense there's some convergence there
I would say that idealism has a "flat" monistic ontology (everything is "mind"), whereas neoplatonism has a multilayered ontology. However, also for neoplatonism, "ideas/forms" (or better, the Ultimate Idea/Form, The One) has primacy, so to speak: the physical/temporal world is a lessening, a deterioration, of the Eternal One. But, at least for Plotinus, once you have the One, you "automatically" have also "matter", just like once you have a source of light you automatically have darkness around it. So neoplatonism is constituted on a polarity and on a degradation from the One (the source of light) to the darkness into which the light radiates. But matter has a negative function (as darkness is lack of light). This influenced St Augustin deeply, by the way (e.g. his idea of evil as lack of good).
Shared "i" Am Hosts will say indeed!
I'm more interested in hearing Vervaeke talk to people like Ziporyn or Garfield, why it's better for the world to be purposeless and meaningless, even from the perspective of spirituality or religion.
The meaning crisis will eventually resolve as a consequence of itself. Unfortunately it will likely occur too late to inform the problematic motivations and behaviors of our species. The vast, vast majority of individuals live in a pathologic cultural illusion (anyone of a plethora of shared fantasy's). This combined with the commoditization of extremely self sufficient human eyeballs doesn't allow for much daylight to intercede.
God can't be a being?
We should frame that as a question. How could God be a being?
The title of this video is the future world. When pathfinding within our own minds on the path that creates the solution we have to acknowledge path failures. If we consider a great labyrinth, if there were only a single direction the journey would not collect any frame of reference during the process, equally heading straight to the exit which may also be the beginning would of left little to be learnt whilst there and maybe perfection in nothingness is the truth but there is something in existence that is also worthy of existence. A refusal to provide and be meaning rejected can inspire a drive to exist whilst still searching with and along the path that from exit to beginning or beginning to exit. Long paths we walk and many paths refused to be sought, some are trialled, many are folly but one more than instinctly searches for a balanced and strategic process for learning along the path.
We have the components that history has provided to use as tools or pieces to be fabricated with.
When building meaning in each of us is possible and the mechanisms for sharing those experiences magnified are moments away in the whole of existence then having a belief that the future is more meaningful for all people.
"i" Am= 1 BODY
It is argued that the original Israeli texts are of a Buddhist nature so for an argument of Christian nationalist countries, who knows.
John presumes or infers what reality is as he mentions and itemises what has nothing to do with reality. By this he takes a leap of faith as to what it is or maybe. By conjecture. As if the simple interactions in a world of sensations lacks reality. Or that the ordinary sense perceptions we wake up to wont do. He suggests we can't share a mental, emotional or unified field of connection in toto. John seems to have isolated a limited perception of his idea of reality as partial, divisive and unknowable. As if what is beyond beyond ( his notion) , is' Reality, but not this here now... for whatever its worth. As if the universe is not enough, good enough or divine or splendid enough, As it is . And of course there is more and more that can also be reduced to this, unto an in divisible zero