I would like to post my source of my claim about Harris. This is not the place to enter into an interpretation debate. From The End of Faith: “If history is any guide, we will not be sure about where the offending warheads are or what their state of readiness is, and so we will be unable to rely on targeted, conventional weapons to destroy them. In such a situation, the only thing likely to ensure our survival may be a nuclear first strike of our own. Needless to say, this would be an unthinkable crime-as it would kill tens of millions of innocent civilians in a single day-but it may be the only course of action available to us, given what Islamists believe. “
Harris sees himself as a moral philosopher. His whole goal in life (at least as it appears to me) is to be a modern day Socrates. That entire book is about illustrating the problems he sees with dogmatic belief. He uses these sorts of edge cases in the way any philosopher would -- as a way to prevent one's intuitions from being bogged down by all the uncertainty, gray areas and mundane complexities of everyday situations. I would have pegged you as someone that recognizes a thought experiment when he sees one... I've been enjoying the series so far, and I'm certainly not going to let a minor thing like this ruin it for me. But still, I'm a little disappointed. There are plenty of things to criticize Harris about (philosophically), but "sanctioning violence" isn't remotely one of them.
I agree this is not the place to enter into an interpretation debate but some context to the quote you give will I think be useful. samharris.org/response-to-chris-hedges/ I am a huge fan of your series and have been inspired by your the ambitious scope and incredibly insightful weaving of some of the most important ideas ever thought. One wrong note cannot spoil a symphony for me and please accept my thanks for producing these videos.
Watching this series feels like witnessing the construction of a cathedral of wisdom, built from cornerstone ideas quarried from the entire history of human thought, wrought into their most useful form by a combination of reason and intuition, and then built up, brick by brick, into a grand new structure, all at the hands of a skilled craftsman working with both vision and purpose. (I know that probably sounds unbearably pretentious, but I've just really been enjoying this series!)
How you weave together history, philosophy and cognitive science is fascinating. I’ve experienced a cascade of insights into my own cognition I would not have found anywhere else. The value of this series is immense.
Book List: 2:43 - The Gnostic Religion by Jonas 9:57 - The Gnostic New Age by DeConick 34:43 - The Courage To Be by Tillich 39:25 - American Fascists by Hedges 39:38 - I don't Believe in Atheists by Hedges 45:18 - Plotinus by Perl 47:21 - Thinking Being by Perl Thank you John for another great Friday video.
haha "I don't believe in atheists" is a great book title. I was into Hedges and truthdig in 2009 after the financial crisis. Maybe it's time for another look :)
Your ending reminded me of the C S Lewis quote, 'I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else'. Another great wonderful video professor. Looking forward to Saint Augustine.
This serious has been really fundamental in my relationship to education. Professor Vervaeke creatively blends so many elements to bring together a tremendous amount of much needed information. Thank you for this Professor Vervaeke!
You Can Only Be It. Holy Shit. Here I am understanding my whole life and why I have arrived at guiding contemporary wilderness rites of passage and integral/developmental/ontological coaching. Thank you again John, so much.
So if I’m understanding correctly, Plotinus was the one who created the Hyrule Triforce, Link is actually me IRL, and Dr JV is the one at the beginning of the game handing me the metaphorical sword of knowledge for overcoming the challenges and existential meaning crisis I’m going to face in my life? It all makes sense now. Still 30 hours to go. Can’t wait to see what else this adventure has in store. Thank you Dr V.
Wow. I watched your conversations with Bernardo Kastrup and Curt Jaimungal on his theories of everything UA-cam channel. Then I found your channel. This was an amazing lecture. Thank you so much for making it available. You’re an electric professor. 🙏🙏🙏
I'm a regular listener there too. John seems to have deeply compelling long form content. It seems comparable in depth to Wolfram's online content, like the humanities counterpart to Wolfram's physics, not the same topic, just similarly profound. It is sort of breathtaking to experience a fully developed intellectual lecturer exploring humanistic content in depth this way. Kastrup and Spira seem to fit the same template as each other, within non-dualism. I'm curious to complete John's lecture set and then reconsider Kastrup and Spira from that perspective.
Every time I listen to these, its a cascade of crescendoing consciousness. A flurry of thoughts that sustains for like 4-6 days. So many new and old ideas, so well put together, but so focused on each individual word. Makes me think a lot. I'll mourn the day this series ends, but weep with joy.
So happy to have finally turned over this mysterious John Vervaeke rock. After recurrent references to this series in associated realms and finally some truly remarkable discussions with Jordan Hall, it was clear you are not just "another one". Truly you are a transcendent epicenter of your own. I see you, sir, and what you are doing for the planet in these historic times nothing less than a merciful gift of love to the bleeding heart of humanity which threatens to swallow us alive. Subscribed!
Fantastic. You are putting together so many “dead ends” I found in my personal search. Thank you for making your lectures available to us all… I look forward to the end of this series and more… it is gratifying when my insticts materialise. Elena
I believe the importance of enacted ritual that Vervaeke describes, explains the emergence of popular team sports in the 21st century, both in the form of participation and spectatorship. Being part of a team which has a common goal has many of the key features of enacted ritual, explaining the prevalent sense of meaning that individuals associate with sport
I've been experiencing a huge psychological crisis this year, this series is an immeasurable help in common to terms what is happening to me. Thank you for making this freely available on UA-cam, John.
Lol I like when he mentions “L.A. Paul,” because it sounds like somebody’s nickname. Maybe a hustler type who hangs out in pool halls. Like “who’s that guy over there with the sunglasses and leather jacket?” “Oh, that’s L.A. Paul…he is quite the character!”
This is my 4th watch through. It ‘clicked’ about how the gnostics ‘seeing the gods as our prison guards’ led to Nietzsche. I know there’s a lot in-between but the click was super vivid on Nietzsche’s Beyond Good and Evil
This series just keep on giving. I am now experiencing the irony of being addicted to watching this series. I am ostensibly using his videos as another source to enhance my understanding of how to pursue transcendence effectively but I simultaneously desire to watch the next episode instead of doing any actual practice. I sell it to myself as needing to lie fallow and build up nutrients in order to effectively engage. Nice trick. I think I’m full of shit though and just like playing with his ideas.
This is funny. I look at it in the same way. Shouldn't we be patient and absorb as much as we can to find our way forward? I feel like when you are ready you will know. This is serious play. 😉
This is fantastic, John! Thank you. As a side note, I’m a part of an eclectic online community of ‘fans’ of David Bentley Hart. Many of us have been heavily influenced by Plotinus and Eric Perl’s’ work (especially the brilliant ‘Thinking Being’). A conversation between yourself and David would be so fruitful, I must say.
Great explanation of integral philosophy in Plotino. The union of natural science (Aristoteles), Spiritual science (Platón) and humanistic science (stoics), is very intresting. Great video. We need to integrate the tree dimensions of what we are and rescue the complexity of the human been, not be denying the science of the spiritual aspects, but been able to integrate them into a unify theory of ourselves.
I watch each of these numerous times and then have to go away for weeks or months to integrate the mind alterations. A great, great gift of complexification
This video is so important, I have phases of being conspiratorial minded and have almost gone down the rabbit hole, I have a Christian friend who believes that “Jews are behind everything”, reasoning being they killed Christ and therefore denying “Logos”. If you read E Michael Jones, it can be almost convincing. The connection to Gnosticism never clicked until this video. I always try and take a step back and remember to focus on myself rather than some external group or person. You, Peterson and the like have the potential to bring so many people from the edge back to the center.
Professor, remember according to Plato allegory of the cave the captive in the cave was compelled to stand up and turn around his sight. The implication is that he could not free him or herself but was raised as it were from the dead and led out of the cave into the Light.
Your section on the dark side of Neoplatonism was very thought-provoking. Presumably, any response to the meaning crisis that frames the problem in terms of a malicious "other" will lead to violence. Conversely, wise responses entail being willing to challenge ourselves and the role we may ourselves unknowingly be playing in perpetuating the problems we face. Getting our own house in order and finding ways to work with others, rather than blaming them. Easy to say and hard to do, as ego-defence and othering can run pretty deep.
Professor Vervaeke, I like the parallel you draw between the gnostics and the nazis and their attitude towards the demiurge. I believe the case youre making is that when a culture is in the midst of a meaning crisis, the ideo of an evil overlord tends to emerge just as it did with the nazis and with the Gnostics. Do you think that the third wave feminists’ relationship with the patriarchy is similar to believing in a maleficent demiurge?
Thanks, John, your Grand Work reaches into 2020, as I follow your collection that I hope many others will see. To see current "national fervors" turn into hate speech is exactly described by your effort in episode 18 to warn us of "reality" in crisis.
This is brilliant, I loved the plot twist, I thought you were going to come out as a raging Gnostic at one point, then it all turned around. Excellent lecture series.
At around 35 mins, Prof makes a very important point about him not being convinced of the transformation required within Christianity to rediscover the sacred and embrace the message of "agape" and to strip itself of its theistic mythology and recover itself from the current meaning crisis it is experiencing. I agree with that. Christianity, if it ever intended to live by the message of agape, failed miserably at it. The institution of church probably hijacked that because, right from the start, church was after power. So, growing the tribe, keeping the tribe within the sphere of church's power were critical to its survival and growth. Hence, the Council of Nicea, and strict adherence to its dogmatic commandments for all mainstream Christian denominations. This made Christianity predatory. The Cross & the Gospels were carried to distant lands to convert the "savages" in the name of Jesus Christ. It was unadulterated brutality committed on native cultures across the globe. It was hegemonic. The arrogance of claiming "exclusivity to God's Truth" and imposing it on other cultures resulted in destruction of many native cultures. It was physical and cultural genocide of the worst kind. The celebrated Saint Francis Xavier and his Inquisition of the "heathens" in Goa, India, stands as a testimony to this brutality. Thousands were brutalized by this "Saint"... children were tortured by gouging their eyes, hacking their fingers, right in front of their parents, to force them to convert. Christianity needs to embrace agape and the message of Love that Jesus stood for. This is not possible as long as the Church, its missionaries and the organized conversion rackets are not abolished. Church should be merely a place of worship, a community gathering to celebrate the sacred. It cannot be a political tool to grow its tribe and expand its power for world domination. This seems to be the problem with both the Abrahamic religions--Christianity & Islam. This rivalry threatens the security of the world and its citizens. Clash of civilization is not a conspiracy theory. One can see the expansion tactics of both Islam and Christianity in India. In the name of religious freedom, ugly tactics are used to destroy the plural traditions of India. So, my hope is that Christians, worldwide, listen to Prof. It is beautiful to hear him talk about the message of agape, self-transformation through discovering the sacred. Christians have to put pressure on the Global Church and its missionaries to stop their conversion activities. They should be asked to respect diverse spiritual traditions, multiple paths to the sacred. This diversity of paths to the divine is essential. Nature evolves through this chaos of diversity. The objective of creating a homogeneous world by spreading Christianity with one holy book, one God and one prophet is a recipe for disaster. This will result in violence and destruction. Let there be billions of paths to the divine. Let there be millions of psychotechnologies that help people of diverse backgrounds to discover their transcended selves. Let there be thousands of spiritual texts/holy books that bring about a positive change and orient humans towards higher consciousness. Let us not use concepts like "born sinner" "only savior" "only God" "one true prophet" etc. We are all divine, not born sinners. Within us, we have the potential to be divine. We do not need an "agent of God" to save us from our sins. We just need the guidance from an enlightened master to discover a path that is right for us (from the perspective of stage of spiritual development we are at) without the dogmas. Let there be a spiritual revolution free of violence that stems from politics of religions.
Watching this a second time, I have a greater respect for the gnosis people were trying to attain for so long, and still are. I'd also love to see a discussion between Vervaeke and Harris. Also, check out Vervaeke's recent dialectics with Joscha Bach on Curt Jaimungal's Theory of Everything Podcast, fantastic content.
Thank you for creating this series, I am looking into your lectures after developing a foundation of psychology/philosophy form Jordan Peterson's, Stoicism, Hinduism, Jiujitsu, and David Hawkins. You are giving me the scientific perspective to better understand and enhance this foundation. I wish you all the best. Cheers.
Great lectures. I just found this series 3 days ago and I've watched 18 episodes already, and I'm going to click the next one forthright. I'm commenting to suggest a different term for what is real. Finding unity of the thing is part of identifying something real, but we can infer that there is something real before identifying it if we just see it's causal effects. Causal effects indicates something is real.
His cosmic game of connect the dots, unveils the intricate human patterns, that span the ages. How our tendencies to lose our way, can be more easily corrected, than we ever knew.
Oh my god that was amazing! thank you so much! I hope that you will write a book John. That can help with the dysfunction of the mental health fields and the diagnosis process...🤔🦋🕊
I am absolutely loving these lectures John. Thank you for making them. Are there any plans to write a book to go with this series? I, for one, would devour it! :)
@@johnvervaeke have you considered self publication for your next books? I would feel more comfortable buying the literary analogs if I knew you were getting 100% of the proceeds.
@@johnvervaeke You've got me so excited for this. Really looking forward to reading this first part. I am reading Zombies in Western Culture right now!
Professor Vervaeke, before everything, I'd like to thank you for the monumental impact this lecture series has been having in my life. I have a question about what you refer to as "extracting gnosis from Gnosticism and extracting agape from Christianity". How can we go about extracting wisdom and practices from different cultures without mismatching them into an ecology of practices and psychotechnologies without unity? What framework can we use to make them... One? Is there a nomological order that would allow purposeful integration of wisdom from various traditions? You showed us that it is important for a person to seek as much as they can a congruent world-view, and it seems to me that this is one of the main objections, for example, for the use of mindfulness meditation by a Christian person, since there would essentially be a mismatch between the practice and the framework within which it was created to bear fruit.
This is great, loving the lecture, but my only complaint is that the microphone gain is turned up too high in this lecture series; all the distortion when you raise your voice is harsh on the ears
It's pretty incredible that Tillich identified the Gnosticism of the Nazi's as they became consumed with grand conspiratorial thinking. Take a look at Rus, Chi or even extreme left or right, and they all clearly demonstrate gnostic thinking.
Another excellent video, another clever dance around the metaphysics of God. I want to riff off your idea of 'realness' - this idea that the thing that is 'real' is the thing that is integrated. You drew the lines on the board, then drew a container around them, then a meta-container around that - on and on like nested matryoshka dolls. You are on to something, identifying 'realness' is exactly that process. So lets keep doing that process. Keep on nesting with greater expansion of awareness as to how those things fit together. Nest the sub-atomic particles into atoms-molecules-cells-crystals-land-acre-continent-world-solarsystem-galaxy-cluster-universe. What is at the end of this process? One thing. What does every religion tell us about God? God is One. It is the ultimate metaphysical truth, the most 'real' thing, the 'SINGULARity'. There is no container around that collection because that collection is everything and infinite by definition. There is a mistake though that this God is defined by the physical, or equating the physical universe with God. That would be a shallow God indeed. The hint at all this is the hard problem of consciousness - this awareness and perception of 'realness'. This is why when people have 'transcendent experiences', they describe them as 'the most real thing ever experienced', because their awareness has taken on a universal quality - if for only a moment. You are correct at the end of your talk that the only way to know the One is to experience it - but what conclusions should we draw from that if us - mere mortals - can experience the universal One (common in transcendent experiences)? And if realness is defined by integration, what does that say of our realness in comparison? Conclusion 1 is that Oneness is God, all is one, you are a piece of that oneness, you (and everything else) is a piece of God. You might not be aware of it, you certainly don't feel like it, but there it is - God made flesh and dwelling among us... more of God made flesh. Conclusion 2 is that it changes how you relate to others. Do you litter if the earth is God? Do you murder if your neighbor is God? Someone wise once said 'whatsoever you do to the least of these, you do unto me'... there you go. The least of these are a part of God, so treat them as such. Give to Cesar what is Cesar and to God what is God's... both are the same. Conclusion 3 is that you and everything else matters. God does not hide himself from himself for no reason. Go investigate, who are you? Turn that eye of awareness back on itself - the answers are not in the physical world even if the tools are. "The light is invisible, but makes everything else seeable" - John. "Let there be Light"... and seeing that the Light was good, God SEPARATED the Light from the Darkness. -God. "This is the first duality" -me. God is the nondual infinite One. We are the human swamped by every apparent form of duality. Our separation is one of belief - belief that these dualities are 'real' when in reality things are more real as the duality is transcended. Atman is Brahman, That art Thou.
Lovely lecture. I would be interested to get your thoughts on the intersection between Plotinus, Buddhism, and quantum mechanics (see especially “Coming to Grips with the Implications of Quantum Mechanics” by Kastrup, Stapp, and Kafatos in Scientific American). Subscribed!
Dear Prof. Vervaeke, though I currently forget the reference - I think Gnostics didn't see suffering just as a result of socio-economic-cultural upheavals. It was a fundamental structure of reality for them. People die or watch others die. They kill other lives to feed themselves. They suffer from diseases and pain, and have to contend with weather and food procurement. (Essentially, many of things which Prince Siddhartha perceived before his ascetic vow in a different place and time.) Early Christians like Ebionites were vegetarians, though I don't know the stance of people who claimed divine experience or Gnosis, but cautious intuition suggests that the stance should have been similar.
At ep. 18 I have worked it out. John you rightly state, we mortals are miserable in being in our normal state, when the odd lucky soul gets to experience a euphoric state he is still not content. So the answer; elect to reside in a state of in-between .I'm calling it the FLOW state.
Great lecture. When you mentioned how Eastern-Ortodox Church persecuted gnosticism in that area, I wish to hear some more specific points about the neo-gnostic movement called Bogomilism. I thought it could be linked well further on with Martin Luther's idea. Anyways, your content is pure gold. 👑
At the start of the video it sounds like John is addressing a dinner conference clanking silverware on dishes while eating and learning how to awaken from the meaning crisis.
providence = that the same god who created chaos and ineluctable suffering amongst mankind also bestowed upon us the eternal ability to deceive ourselves, via belief systems, with endlessly subjective bullshit defining and prescribing a means to perceiving 'meaning'. thankee jesus! blessed!
19:30 "something in us" Ontogeny and phylogeny live together in perfect harmony... There was a time after speciation during which conscious humanity became possible. There was a time between my conception and now during which my conscious self came into being (in this irksome intermittent fashion). Isn't that "something in us" simply our conscious self? Seems to me that it is my self that is conscious. In the absence of my self what meaning can possibly adhere to the word 'conscious'? Surely, when my self ceases being (in dreamless sleep for instance), is the reason my being conscious ceases also? That 'self' and 'conscious' are so intimate makes 'conscious self' seem... redundant. 'I am' and 'I am conscious' seem to mean the same, exactly. (I take 'self' to be a dynamic complex metaphor instantiated and maintained by a subset of my neural substrate. I see my self metaphor embedded in a vast network of unconscious metaphors maintained by base firing rates, inter-modulating (via synapses), new metaphors arriving moment to moment via neurons from the sense organs of my body and of course being synthesized by memory metaphor intermodulation. (The boundary between the self and its unconscious surround has to be so extraordinarily dynamic as to dissolve the boundary concept). The concept of a conscious 'mode' of substrate operation obviously important to this story. When these unconscious metaphors modulate my self metaphor complex we call the process being conscious. (Hard problem solved?) And then at the heart of the (non humuncular) self metaphor there must be that function, I forget now what you called it (salience intention comparator?), that evaluates the modulations (a gestaltish operation) so as to send appropriate control metaphors to the muscles). (The image of a gelatinous quivering mass of metaphors writhing in an extraordinarily complex dance evolved to accomplish replication and so fulfill one of the potentials of atomic nature comes to mind (Ep.30 playing as I edit)). What sequence of events could transform instinct driven apes into conscious people? I believe Julian Jaynes' explanation to be the best one (I mean of course most plausible, elegant & profound (Ep. 26 induced this edit)). The bicameral gods lost total control when we became conscious. The history of the two millennia since the great transiliation is the story of the consequences of our becoming conscious. The gods that ruled bicameral minded agricultural people in the survival interests of civilization and that are today maintained by venerable tradition can't help being anti democratic. (Democracy, as civilization's control system, despite it's weaknesses, seems to us and many others vastly preferable to totalitarian systems like religion with its kings, aristocrats and clergy lording over us their lucky squats atop the pyramids of power, now that we are conscious. Who'd have guessed that capitalism would try to turn back the clock. (I'm sure someone has, perhaps Richard Wolff)). (Ten thousand years of experience has made religious psychological control techniques extraordinarily effective. And so our struggle for self control is bound to go on a while longer. IMHO, naturally). Three cheers for your mahvelous educational efforts. I appreciate them.
And I see clearly that when I've done listening to your whole series I'll have to listen once again to your conversations with B. Kastrup (whose mind-at-large idea strikes me as utter nonsense).
samharris.org/response-to-controversy/ Down the page is an excerpt that reads - It should be of particular concern to us that the beliefs of Muslims pose a special problem for nuclear deterrence. There is little possibility of our having a cold war with an Islamist regime armed with long-range nuclear weapons. A cold war requires that the parties be mutually deterred by the threat of death. Notions of martyrdom and jihad run roughshod over the logic that allowed the United States and the Soviet Union to pass half a century perched, more or less stably, on the brink of Armageddon. What will we do if an Islamist regime, which grows dewy-eyed at the mere mention of paradise, ever acquires long-range nuclear weaponry? If history is any guide, we will not be sure about where the offending warheads are or what their state of readiness is, and so we will be unable to rely on targeted, conventional weapons to destroy them. In such a situation, the only thing likely to ensure our survival may be a nuclear first strike of our own. Needless to say, this would be an unthinkable crime-as it would kill tens of millions of innocent civilians in a single day-but it may be the only course of action available to us, given what Islamists believe. How would such an unconscionable act of self-defense be perceived by the rest of the Muslim world? It would likely be seen as the first incursion of a genocidal crusade. The horrible irony here is that seeing could make it so: this very perception could plunge us into a state of hot war with any Muslim state that had the capacity to pose a nuclear threat of its own. All of this is perfectly insane, of course: I have just described a plausible scenario in which much of the world’s population could be annihilated on account of religious ideas that belong on the same shelf with Batman, the philosopher’s stone, and unicorns. That it would be a horrible absurdity for so many of us to die for the sake of myth does not mean, however, that it could not happen. Indeed, given the immunity to all reasonable intrusions that faith enjoys in our discourse, a catastrophe of this sort seems increasingly likely. We must come to terms with the possibility that men who are every bit as zealous to die as the nineteen hijackers may one day get their hands on long-range nuclear weaponry. The Muslim world in particular must anticipate this possibility and find some way to prevent it. Given the steady proliferation of technology, it is safe to say that time is not on our side. I didnt bother to look for Hitchen's argument. I cant see it would be much different than this i.e. a cold war is not possible with a martyrdom embracing society.
Go back to the Socrates lecture. Chasing something without being clear what it is (e.g. trying to be happy without understanding what it means to be happy) allows for misplaced salience and self-deception.
Sometimes I just want to keep searching, because I think that there is someone or some text that will help me reach it. But at this point I have read and watched enough that sometimes "I just get it" The Search is not going to give it to you, you just need to Be.
I'm struggling with the idea of something being more or less real _before_ we sense it as such. We created a definition with the help of the notion of oneness but why did we do that in the first place? Does oneness "objectively" exist‽
The problem with the gnostic perspective of "gods as prison guards", is that, you don't just get to transcend God, and not suffer, which was the point all along. If God is defined as the one universal, I don't see how you would transcend something that is non-material and unified as one with the universe.
I'm always looking for new interesting lectures on Psychology/Philosophy, please let me know if you guys have any recommendations, would be highly appreciated
Perhaps one can have an unpopular but still possibly true, historical understanding of the Jewish ethnicity and religion without violence being assumed. Do all gnostic (or gnostic Christian?) viewpoints of Jewish fundamentalist supremacy have to end in the gnostic being a violent aggressor? The Nazis were your typical authoritarian collectivist violent mafia style government, like all governments are now and were then. I think most Gnostics are living a renouncing and introspective lifestyle and one of the least likely to participate in violent collectivist behavior. Is this linking of Gnosticism and Nazism is a continuation of propagandistic attack against gnostic heretics? I really am not sure. But this lecture IS amazing.
the candle deceived, seek the sunlight! Fortunately, you do not have to look far, as we have global communication, thousands of philosophers talking together, here and now.
Metaphysical Realism: Reality = That which is. Since only That which is can either affirm or deny that there either is or is not That which is, there is That which is.
I would like to post my source of my claim about Harris. This is not the place to enter into an interpretation debate. From The End of Faith: “If history is any guide, we will not be sure about where the offending warheads are or what their state of readiness is, and so we will be unable to rely on targeted, conventional weapons to destroy them. In such a situation, the only thing likely to ensure our survival may be a nuclear first strike of our own. Needless to say, this would be an unthinkable crime-as it would kill tens of millions of innocent civilians in a single day-but it may be the only course of action available to us, given what Islamists believe. “
Harris sees himself as a moral philosopher. His whole goal in life (at least as it appears to me) is to be a modern day Socrates. That entire book is about illustrating the problems he sees with dogmatic belief. He uses these sorts of edge cases in the way any philosopher would -- as a way to prevent one's intuitions from being bogged down by all the uncertainty, gray areas and mundane complexities of everyday situations. I would have pegged you as someone that recognizes a thought experiment when he sees one...
I've been enjoying the series so far, and I'm certainly not going to let a minor thing like this ruin it for me. But still, I'm a little disappointed. There are plenty of things to criticize Harris about (philosophically), but "sanctioning violence" isn't remotely one of them.
I'm more offended by how you're pronouncing "nuclear" than by your reading of Harris.
I agree this is not the place to enter into an interpretation debate but some context to the quote you give will I think be useful.
samharris.org/response-to-chris-hedges/
I am a huge fan of your series and have been inspired by your the ambitious scope and incredibly insightful weaving of some of the most important ideas ever thought.
One wrong note cannot spoil a symphony for me and please accept my thanks for producing these videos.
rufusdark Thank you for the graciousness of your reply. I appreciate it.
Steve Patterson This was a thoughtful and gracious reply. I appreciate it.
Everyone gangsta until they fail to engage in participatory knowing
Too Real.
Watching this series feels like witnessing the construction of a cathedral of wisdom, built from cornerstone ideas quarried from the entire history of human thought, wrought into their most useful form by a combination of reason and intuition, and then built up, brick by brick, into a grand new structure, all at the hands of a skilled craftsman working with both vision and purpose.
(I know that probably sounds unbearably pretentious, but I've just really been enjoying this series!)
How you weave together history, philosophy and cognitive science is fascinating. I’ve experienced a cascade of insights into my own cognition I would not have found anywhere else.
The value of this series is immense.
Book List:
2:43 - The Gnostic Religion by Jonas
9:57 - The Gnostic New Age by DeConick
34:43 - The Courage To Be by Tillich
39:25 - American Fascists by Hedges
39:38 - I don't Believe in Atheists by Hedges
45:18 - Plotinus by Perl
47:21 - Thinking Being by Perl
Thank you John for another great Friday video.
haha "I don't believe in atheists" is a great book title. I was into Hedges and truthdig in 2009 after the financial crisis. Maybe it's time for another look :)
Thank you for doing this.
@@bigalelks My pleasure. I know I'll be referencing back to these lectures, and I'd like to think this series will be relevant for years to come!
Thanks!
Thanks man
Your ending reminded me of the C S Lewis quote, 'I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else'. Another great wonderful video professor. Looking forward to Saint Augustine.
This serious has been really fundamental in my relationship to education. Professor Vervaeke creatively blends so many elements to bring together a tremendous amount of much needed information. Thank you for this Professor Vervaeke!
You Can Only Be It. Holy Shit. Here I am understanding my whole life and why I have arrived at guiding contemporary wilderness rites of passage and integral/developmental/ontological coaching. Thank you again John, so much.
So if I’m understanding correctly, Plotinus was the one who created the Hyrule Triforce, Link is actually me IRL, and Dr JV is the one at the beginning of the game handing me the metaphorical sword of knowledge for overcoming the challenges and existential meaning crisis I’m going to face in my life? It all makes sense now.
Still 30 hours to go. Can’t wait to see what else this adventure has in store. Thank you Dr V.
This comment is seriously underrated
Wow. I watched your conversations with Bernardo Kastrup and Curt Jaimungal on his theories of everything UA-cam channel. Then I found your channel. This was an amazing lecture. Thank you so much for making it available. You’re an electric professor. 🙏🙏🙏
Nice to know others also came from Curt
I think you mean this video
ua-cam.com/video/UWcTmeAs44I/v-deo.html
I'm a regular listener there too. John seems to have deeply compelling long form content. It seems comparable in depth to Wolfram's online content, like the humanities counterpart to Wolfram's physics, not the same topic, just similarly profound.
It is sort of breathtaking to experience a fully developed intellectual lecturer exploring humanistic content in depth this way.
Kastrup and Spira seem to fit the same template as each other, within non-dualism. I'm curious to complete John's lecture set and then reconsider Kastrup and Spira from that perspective.
Every time I listen to these, its a cascade of crescendoing consciousness. A flurry of thoughts that sustains for like 4-6 days. So many new and old ideas, so well put together, but so focused on each individual word. Makes me think a lot.
I'll mourn the day this series ends, but weep with joy.
Did you make it? Did you finish? What's happened to you in the last 2 years?
@@n8works Been mourning and weeping ever since.
So happy to have finally turned over this mysterious John Vervaeke rock. After recurrent references to this series in associated realms and finally some truly remarkable discussions with Jordan Hall, it was clear you are not just "another one". Truly you are a transcendent epicenter of your own. I see you, sir, and what you are doing for the planet in these historic times nothing less than a merciful gift of love to the bleeding heart of humanity which threatens to swallow us alive.
Subscribed!
Fantastic. You are putting together so many “dead ends” I found in my personal search. Thank you for making your lectures available to us all… I look forward to the end of this series and more… it is gratifying when my insticts materialise. Elena
I believe the importance of enacted ritual that Vervaeke describes, explains the emergence of popular team sports in the 21st century, both in the form of participation and spectatorship. Being part of a team which has a common goal has many of the key features of enacted ritual, explaining the prevalent sense of meaning that individuals associate with sport
John Vervaeke, this series becomes more precious to me with each episode. You are an utterly brilliant mind. Respectfully sent from the UK.
I can’t stop watching this series. Beautiful, intelligent and elevating. ❤
Thank you for doing this, John! Your lecture are a gold mine for me.
I've been experiencing a huge psychological crisis this year, this series is an immeasurable help in common to terms what is happening to me. Thank you for making this freely available on UA-cam, John.
Lol I like when he mentions “L.A. Paul,” because it sounds like somebody’s nickname. Maybe a hustler type who hangs out in pool halls. Like “who’s that guy over there with the sunglasses and leather jacket?”
“Oh, that’s L.A. Paul…he is quite the character!”
This is my 4th watch through. It ‘clicked’ about how the gnostics ‘seeing the gods as our prison guards’ led to Nietzsche. I know there’s a lot in-between but the click was super vivid on Nietzsche’s Beyond Good and Evil
@ 47:05 "That's the gap of bullshit!" with the greatest gesture xD. Great lecture as always.
Thank you very much for your time and dedication.
This series just keep on giving. I am now experiencing the irony of being addicted to watching this series. I am ostensibly using his videos as another source to enhance my understanding of how to pursue transcendence effectively but I simultaneously desire to watch the next episode instead of doing any actual practice. I sell it to myself as needing to lie fallow and build up nutrients in order to effectively engage. Nice trick. I think I’m full of shit though and just like playing with his ideas.
This is funny. I look at it in the same way. Shouldn't we be patient and absorb as much as we can to find our way forward? I feel like when you are ready you will know. This is serious play. 😉
I really loved this comment. Thanks!
This is fantastic, John! Thank you. As a side note, I’m a part of an eclectic online community of ‘fans’ of David Bentley Hart. Many of us have been heavily influenced by Plotinus and Eric Perl’s’ work (especially the brilliant ‘Thinking Being’). A conversation between yourself and David would be so fruitful, I must say.
Great explanation of integral philosophy in Plotino. The union of natural science (Aristoteles), Spiritual science (Platón) and humanistic science (stoics), is very intresting. Great video. We need to integrate the tree dimensions of what we are and rescue the complexity of the human been, not be denying the science of the spiritual aspects, but been able to integrate them into a unify theory of ourselves.
I watch each of these numerous times and then have to go away for weeks or months to integrate the mind alterations. A great, great gift of complexification
This video is so important, I have phases of being conspiratorial minded and have almost gone down the rabbit hole, I have a Christian friend who believes that “Jews are behind everything”, reasoning being they killed Christ and therefore denying “Logos”. If you read E Michael Jones, it can be almost convincing. The connection to Gnosticism never clicked until this video. I always try and take a step back and remember to focus on myself rather than some external group or person. You, Peterson and the like have the potential to bring so many people from the edge back to the center.
Professor, remember according to Plato allegory of the cave the captive in the cave was compelled to stand up and turn around his sight. The implication is that he could not free him or herself but was raised as it were from the dead and led out of the cave into the Light.
Another feast for thought. Thank you for all your effort. 🙏
Amazing lectures. Thank you for your work.
Recently I was looking into Gnosticism and this was very helpful, awesome series!
Your section on the dark side of Neoplatonism was very thought-provoking. Presumably, any response to the meaning crisis that frames the problem in terms of a malicious "other" will lead to violence. Conversely, wise responses entail being willing to challenge ourselves and the role we may ourselves unknowingly be playing in perpetuating the problems we face. Getting our own house in order and finding ways to work with others, rather than blaming them. Easy to say and hard to do, as ego-defence and othering can run pretty deep.
Professor Vervaeke, I like the parallel you draw between the gnostics and the nazis and their attitude towards the demiurge. I believe the case youre making is that when a culture is in the midst of a meaning crisis, the ideo of an evil overlord tends to emerge just as it did with the nazis and with the Gnostics.
Do you think that the third wave feminists’ relationship with the patriarchy is similar to believing in a maleficent demiurge?
Feminist Maleficient Demiurge played by Angelina Jolie
Communism has the same relationship
Thanks, John, your Grand Work reaches into 2020, as I follow your collection that I hope many others will see. To see current "national fervors" turn into hate speech is exactly described by your effort in episode 18 to warn us of "reality" in crisis.
There seems to be some kind of cut in the video between 41:04-41:06. Have you noticed it too?
Yay! Checking my subscriptions on Fridays!
This is brilliant, I loved the plot twist, I thought you were going to come out as a raging Gnostic at one point, then it all turned around. Excellent lecture series.
Just incredible! Thank you.
At around 35 mins, Prof makes a very important point about him not being convinced of the transformation required within Christianity to rediscover the sacred and embrace the message of "agape" and to strip itself of its theistic mythology and recover itself from the current meaning crisis it is experiencing.
I agree with that. Christianity, if it ever intended to live by the message of agape, failed miserably at it. The institution of church probably hijacked that because, right from the start, church was after power. So, growing the tribe, keeping the tribe within the sphere of church's power were critical to its survival and growth. Hence, the Council of Nicea, and strict adherence to its dogmatic commandments for all mainstream Christian denominations. This made Christianity predatory. The Cross & the Gospels were carried to distant lands to convert the "savages" in the name of Jesus Christ. It was unadulterated brutality committed on native cultures across the globe. It was hegemonic. The arrogance of claiming "exclusivity to God's Truth" and imposing it on other cultures resulted in destruction of many native cultures. It was physical and cultural genocide of the worst kind. The celebrated Saint Francis Xavier and his Inquisition of the "heathens" in Goa, India, stands as a testimony to this brutality. Thousands were brutalized by this "Saint"... children were tortured by gouging their eyes, hacking their fingers, right in front of their parents, to force them to convert.
Christianity needs to embrace agape and the message of Love that Jesus stood for. This is not possible as long as the Church, its missionaries and the organized conversion rackets are not abolished. Church should be merely a place of worship, a community gathering to celebrate the sacred. It cannot be a political tool to grow its tribe and expand its power for world domination. This seems to be the problem with both the Abrahamic religions--Christianity & Islam. This rivalry threatens the security of the world and its citizens. Clash of civilization is not a conspiracy theory. One can see the expansion tactics of both Islam and Christianity in India. In the name of religious freedom, ugly tactics are used to destroy the plural traditions of India.
So, my hope is that Christians, worldwide, listen to Prof. It is beautiful to hear him talk about the message of agape, self-transformation through discovering the sacred. Christians have to put pressure on the Global Church and its missionaries to stop their conversion activities. They should be asked to respect diverse spiritual traditions, multiple paths to the sacred. This diversity of paths to the divine is essential. Nature evolves through this chaos of diversity. The objective of creating a homogeneous world by spreading Christianity with one holy book, one God and one prophet is a recipe for disaster. This will result in violence and destruction.
Let there be billions of paths to the divine. Let there be millions of psychotechnologies that help people of diverse backgrounds to discover their transcended selves. Let there be thousands of spiritual texts/holy books that bring about a positive change and orient humans towards higher consciousness. Let us not use concepts like "born sinner" "only savior" "only God" "one true prophet" etc. We are all divine, not born sinners. Within us, we have the potential to be divine. We do not need an "agent of God" to save us from our sins. We just need the guidance from an enlightened master to discover a path that is right for us (from the perspective of stage of spiritual development we are at) without the dogmas. Let there be a spiritual revolution free of violence that stems from politics of religions.
Praveen Rai join the Quakers, they have kept the Christian spirit in its purest form
"pluralism". I think you meant caste opression within Hinduism?. Are you one of those cracks thinking " Hindu khatre me hai" . Grow up
@@beluga2841 Calm down! This is not the place to show your Hindumisia. You should extricate yourself from your madrasa education.
@@praveenrai6965 typical of andh bhakts. Just come at me with ad hominem attacks and feel good about yourself. Go hide "Hindu khatre me hai"
Christ crucified is the ultimate message of Agape love. We all need to not judge a religion based on how it is abused.
Watching this a second time, I have a greater respect for the gnosis people were trying to attain for so long, and still are. I'd also love to see a discussion between Vervaeke and Harris. Also, check out Vervaeke's recent dialectics with Joscha Bach on Curt Jaimungal's Theory of Everything Podcast, fantastic content.
This is the best explication of the monad I have encountered.
Whew, another doozie of a lecture! Thank you, John. I can imagine that what you are doing takes great courage.
Brilliant discussions and book recommendations. Thanks for posting.
Thanks John.
Thank you for always thanking me.
@@johnvervaeke Thank you, John, for thanking us for always thanking you.
39:00 "Violence is acceptable because the system is evil." Very dangerous thought, indeed. The Master's tools will never dismantle the Master's house.
Pure potentiality - pure actuality
Higher level of the self, reality
Pursuit of realness - what makes something real
Thank you for creating this series, I am looking into your lectures after developing a foundation of psychology/philosophy form Jordan Peterson's, Stoicism, Hinduism, Jiujitsu, and David Hawkins. You are giving me the scientific perspective to better understand and enhance this foundation.
I wish you all the best. Cheers.
Great lectures. I just found this series 3 days ago and I've watched 18 episodes already, and I'm going to click the next one forthright.
I'm commenting to suggest a different term for what is real. Finding unity of the thing is part of identifying something real, but we can infer that there is something real before identifying it if we just see it's causal effects. Causal effects indicates something is real.
His cosmic game of connect the dots, unveils the intricate human patterns, that span the ages. How our tendencies to lose our way, can be more easily corrected, than we ever knew.
Very good lecture. Makes me want to re-study Plotinus again. Thank you
Oh my god that was amazing! thank you so much! I hope that you will write a book John. That can help with the dysfunction of the mental health fields and the diagnosis process...🤔🦋🕊
You just cleared so much up about my life, thank you so much for these incredible lectures!
I appreciate YOUR time JV ❤️🍄
I am absolutely loving these lectures John. Thank you for making them. Are there any plans to write a book to go with this series? I, for one, would devour it! :)
Yes part 1 which covers to episode 25 is at a literary agent right now. I am seeking publication
@@johnvervaeke Wonderful! I very much look forward to it. Thank you again for these superb and life changing lectures. Warm Wishes, Edward
Do you have a go fund me or something that we can donate too until the book comes out?
@@johnvervaeke have you considered self publication for your next books? I would feel more comfortable buying the literary analogs if I knew you were getting 100% of the proceeds.
@@johnvervaeke You've got me so excited for this. Really looking forward to reading this first part. I am reading Zombies in Western Culture right now!
At first impression it seems that this "one" of plotinus is strongly related to the idea of emptiness of the buddhists. Could that be right?
This is a fantastic lecture.
Professor Vervaeke, before everything, I'd like to thank you for the monumental impact this lecture series has been having in my life. I have a question about what you refer to as "extracting gnosis from Gnosticism and extracting agape from Christianity". How can we go about extracting wisdom and practices from different cultures without mismatching them into an ecology of practices and psychotechnologies without unity? What framework can we use to make them... One? Is there a nomological order that would allow purposeful integration of wisdom from various traditions? You showed us that it is important for a person to seek as much as they can a congruent world-view, and it seems to me that this is one of the main objections, for example, for the use of mindfulness meditation by a Christian person, since there would essentially be a mismatch between the practice and the framework within which it was created to bear fruit.
Rebel Wisdom brought me here
This is great, loving the lecture, but my only complaint is that the microphone gain is turned up too high in this lecture series; all the distortion when you raise your voice is harsh on the ears
This is very insightful but WHERE to find groups of people on par with this? I’ve looked for years.
Try the Awaken to Meaning platform.
@@johnvervaeke Thank you very much!
Thank you John
It's pretty incredible that Tillich identified the Gnosticism of the Nazi's as they became consumed with grand conspiratorial thinking.
Take a look at Rus, Chi or even extreme left or right, and they all clearly demonstrate gnostic thinking.
Incredibly good.
39:50 is he referring to Sam Harris?
Another excellent video, another clever dance around the metaphysics of God.
I want to riff off your idea of 'realness' - this idea that the thing that is 'real' is the thing that is integrated. You drew the lines on the board, then drew a container around them, then a meta-container around that - on and on like nested matryoshka dolls. You are on to something, identifying 'realness' is exactly that process.
So lets keep doing that process. Keep on nesting with greater expansion of awareness as to how those things fit together. Nest the sub-atomic particles into atoms-molecules-cells-crystals-land-acre-continent-world-solarsystem-galaxy-cluster-universe. What is at the end of this process?
One thing. What does every religion tell us about God? God is One. It is the ultimate metaphysical truth, the most 'real' thing, the 'SINGULARity'. There is no container around that collection because that collection is everything and infinite by definition.
There is a mistake though that this God is defined by the physical, or equating the physical universe with God. That would be a shallow God indeed. The hint at all this is the hard problem of consciousness - this awareness and perception of 'realness'. This is why when people have 'transcendent experiences', they describe them as 'the most real thing ever experienced', because their awareness has taken on a universal quality - if for only a moment.
You are correct at the end of your talk that the only way to know the One is to experience it - but what conclusions should we draw from that if us - mere mortals - can experience the universal One (common in transcendent experiences)? And if realness is defined by integration, what does that say of our realness in comparison?
Conclusion 1 is that Oneness is God, all is one, you are a piece of that oneness, you (and everything else) is a piece of God. You might not be aware of it, you certainly don't feel like it, but there it is - God made flesh and dwelling among us... more of God made flesh.
Conclusion 2 is that it changes how you relate to others. Do you litter if the earth is God? Do you murder if your neighbor is God? Someone wise once said 'whatsoever you do to the least of these, you do unto me'... there you go. The least of these are a part of God, so treat them as such. Give to Cesar what is Cesar and to God what is God's... both are the same.
Conclusion 3 is that you and everything else matters. God does not hide himself from himself for no reason. Go investigate, who are you? Turn that eye of awareness back on itself - the answers are not in the physical world even if the tools are.
"The light is invisible, but makes everything else seeable" - John. "Let there be Light"... and seeing that the Light was good, God SEPARATED the Light from the Darkness. -God. "This is the first duality" -me. God is the nondual infinite One. We are the human swamped by every apparent form of duality. Our separation is one of belief - belief that these dualities are 'real' when in reality things are more real as the duality is transcended.
Atman is Brahman, That art Thou.
Bob Brenton thank you. This is written so beautifully and persuasively.
Lovely lecture. I would be interested to get your thoughts on the intersection between Plotinus, Buddhism, and quantum mechanics (see especially “Coming to Grips with the Implications of Quantum Mechanics” by Kastrup, Stapp, and Kafatos in Scientific American). Subscribed!
Dear Prof. Vervaeke, though I currently forget the reference - I think Gnostics didn't see suffering just as a result of socio-economic-cultural upheavals. It was a fundamental structure of reality for them. People die or watch others die. They kill other lives to feed themselves. They suffer from diseases and pain, and have to contend with weather and food procurement. (Essentially, many of things which Prince Siddhartha perceived before his ascetic vow in a different place and time.) Early Christians like Ebionites were vegetarians, though I don't know the stance of people who claimed divine experience or Gnosis, but cautious intuition suggests that the stance should have been similar.
At ep. 18 I have worked it out. John you rightly state, we mortals are miserable in being in our normal state, when the odd lucky soul gets to experience a euphoric state he is still not content. So the answer; elect to reside in a state of in-between .I'm calling it the FLOW state.
Nope, still a temporary state and ultimately unsatisfying.
I cant find any books or teachings by this Anna Goggie at all 🤔
Anagoge is an Ancient Greek term for ascent. It is the process of self-transcendence. But perhaps you are just being playful.
Powerful.... thank you
Great lecture. When you mentioned how Eastern-Ortodox Church persecuted gnosticism in that area, I wish to hear some more specific points about the neo-gnostic movement called Bogomilism. I thought it could be linked well further on with Martin Luther's idea.
Anyways, your content is pure gold. 👑
In Sunday school l was taught that Jesus is love.
At the start of the video it sounds like John is addressing a dinner conference clanking silverware on dishes while eating and learning how to awaken from the meaning crisis.
So excited!
39:50 does he mention Harris as in Sam Harris?
Yes.
providence = that the same god who created chaos and ineluctable suffering amongst mankind also bestowed upon us the eternal ability to deceive ourselves, via belief systems, with endlessly subjective bullshit defining and prescribing a means to perceiving 'meaning'. thankee jesus! blessed!
19:30 "something in us"
Ontogeny and phylogeny live together in perfect harmony...
There was a time after speciation
during which conscious humanity became possible.
There was a time between my conception and now
during which my conscious self came into being (in this irksome intermittent fashion).
Isn't that "something in us" simply our conscious self?
Seems to me that it is my self that is conscious.
In the absence of my self what meaning can possibly adhere to the word 'conscious'?
Surely, when my self ceases being (in dreamless sleep for instance),
is the reason my being conscious ceases also?
That 'self' and 'conscious' are so intimate makes 'conscious self' seem... redundant.
'I am'
and
'I am conscious'
seem to mean the same, exactly.
(I take 'self' to be a dynamic complex metaphor instantiated and maintained by a subset of my neural substrate. I see my self metaphor embedded in a vast network of unconscious metaphors maintained by base firing rates, inter-modulating (via synapses), new metaphors arriving moment to moment via neurons from the sense organs of my body and of course being synthesized by memory metaphor intermodulation.
(The boundary between the self and its unconscious surround has to be so extraordinarily dynamic as to dissolve the boundary concept).
The concept of a conscious 'mode' of substrate operation obviously important to this story.
When these unconscious metaphors modulate my self metaphor complex we call the process being conscious. (Hard problem solved?)
And then at the heart of the (non humuncular) self metaphor there must be that function, I forget now what you called it (salience intention comparator?), that evaluates the modulations (a gestaltish operation) so as to send appropriate control metaphors to the muscles). (The image of a gelatinous quivering mass of metaphors writhing in an extraordinarily complex dance evolved to accomplish replication and so fulfill one of the potentials of atomic nature comes to mind (Ep.30 playing as I edit)).
What sequence of events could transform instinct driven apes into conscious people?
I believe Julian Jaynes' explanation to be the best one
(I mean of course most plausible, elegant & profound (Ep. 26 induced this edit)).
The bicameral gods lost total control when we became conscious.
The history of the two millennia since the great transiliation
is the story of the consequences of our becoming conscious.
The gods that ruled bicameral minded agricultural people
in the survival interests of civilization
and that are today maintained by venerable tradition
can't help being anti democratic.
(Democracy, as civilization's control system, despite it's weaknesses,
seems to us and many others vastly preferable to
totalitarian systems like religion with its kings, aristocrats and clergy
lording over us their lucky squats atop the pyramids of power,
now that we are conscious.
Who'd have guessed that capitalism would try to turn back the clock.
(I'm sure someone has, perhaps Richard Wolff)).
(Ten thousand years of experience has made religious psychological control techniques extraordinarily effective. And so our struggle for self control is bound to go on a while longer.
IMHO, naturally).
Three cheers for your mahvelous educational efforts. I appreciate them.
And I see clearly that when I've done listening to your whole series I'll have to listen once again to your conversations with B. Kastrup (whose mind-at-large idea strikes me as utter nonsense).
Just ran across something where Pirsig indicates that of the philosophers, he is most like Plotinus
I thought so!!
39:54 Hang on is that correct? That's quite the accusation. Can someone point me to sources of what he's talking about there?
samharris.org/response-to-controversy/
Down the page is an excerpt that reads -
It should be of particular concern to us that the beliefs of Muslims pose a special problem for nuclear deterrence. There is little possibility of our having a cold war with an Islamist regime armed with long-range nuclear weapons. A cold war requires that the parties be mutually deterred by the threat of death. Notions of martyrdom and jihad run roughshod over the logic that allowed the United States and the Soviet Union to pass half a century perched, more or less stably, on the brink of Armageddon. What will we do if an Islamist regime, which grows dewy-eyed at the mere mention of paradise, ever acquires long-range nuclear weaponry? If history is any guide, we will not be sure about where the offending warheads are or what their state of readiness is, and so we will be unable to rely on targeted, conventional weapons to destroy them. In such a situation, the only thing likely to ensure our survival may be a nuclear first strike of our own. Needless to say, this would be an unthinkable crime-as it would kill tens of millions of innocent civilians in a single day-but it may be the only course of action available to us, given what Islamists believe. How would such an unconscionable act of self-defense be perceived by the rest of the Muslim world? It would likely be seen as the first incursion of a genocidal crusade. The horrible irony here is that seeing could make it so: this very perception could plunge us into a state of hot war with any Muslim state that had the capacity to pose a nuclear threat of its own. All of this is perfectly insane, of course: I have just described a plausible scenario in which much of the world’s population could be annihilated on account of religious ideas that belong on the same shelf with Batman, the philosopher’s stone, and unicorns. That it would be a horrible absurdity for so many of us to die for the sake of myth does not mean, however, that it could not happen. Indeed, given the immunity to all reasonable intrusions that faith enjoys in our discourse, a catastrophe of this sort seems increasingly likely. We must come to terms with the possibility that men who are every bit as zealous to die as the nineteen hijackers may one day get their hands on long-range nuclear weaponry. The Muslim world in particular must anticipate this possibility and find some way to prevent it. Given the steady proliferation of technology, it is safe to say that time is not on our side.
I didnt bother to look for Hitchen's argument. I cant see it would be much different than this i.e. a cold war is not possible with a martyrdom embracing society.
Are there any connections between Plotinus and Spinoza? Did Spinoza read the work of Plotinus?
41:04 ? what happend there?
47:00 Admittedly, this "gap of Bullshit" reference went past me.
Go back to the Socrates lecture. Chasing something without being clear what it is (e.g. trying to be happy without understanding what it means to be happy) allows for misplaced salience and self-deception.
Sometimes I just want to keep searching, because I think that there is someone or some text that will help me reach it. But at this point I have read and watched enough that sometimes "I just get it" The Search is not going to give it to you, you just need to Be.
I'm struggling with the idea of something being more or less real _before_ we sense it as such. We created a definition with the help of the notion of oneness but why did we do that in the first place? Does oneness "objectively" exist‽
@ vervaekes I wish you would say more about what do you mean “we should have an ambivalent attitude towards Gnosticism”. Maybe it is explained later?
The problem with the gnostic perspective of "gods as prison guards", is that, you don't just get to transcend God, and not suffer, which was the point all along.
If God is defined as the one universal, I don't see how you would transcend something that is non-material and unified as one with the universe.
It sounds a lot like wishful post-modernism
I'm always looking for new interesting lectures on Psychology/Philosophy, please let me know if you guys have any recommendations, would be highly appreciated
this is some profound stuff
Off-topic: whats the name of the song in the intro please?
Gymnopedie No. 1 by Erik Satie
52:00 the one, like Neo, but more like being one of all, not having one of all
Perhaps one can have an unpopular but still possibly true, historical understanding of the Jewish ethnicity and religion without violence being assumed. Do all gnostic (or gnostic Christian?) viewpoints of Jewish fundamentalist supremacy have to end in the gnostic being a violent aggressor? The Nazis were your typical authoritarian collectivist violent mafia style government, like all governments are now and were then. I think most Gnostics are living a renouncing and introspective lifestyle and one of the least likely to participate in violent collectivist behavior. Is this linking of Gnosticism and Nazism is a continuation of propagandistic attack against gnostic heretics? I really am not sure. But this lecture IS amazing.
🌞
The One - Reality is realized, mind realized reality
You can't have it, you can be it
Culmination of everything from Greek Axial Age
What's the name of the piano intro at the beginning and end of the video?
Gymnopédie No. 1, by Satie
Plotinus doesn’t surface until after the 40 minute mark... But yet another provocative video as usual!
is friendship with God the same as self transcendence?
Horrifically relevant, Plato's shadows dance against my skull. Must think my way through this cave. Luckily, there is always a candle to be had.
the candle deceived, seek the sunlight! Fortunately, you do not have to look far, as we have global communication, thousands of philosophers talking together, here and now.
John, I would love to hear you speak on Plotinus' notion of Nous. Do you address this anywhere?
Not here. I am introducing Neoplatonism and the centrality of intelligibility in some of my more recent talks.
@@johnvervaeke Upcoming? Or uploaded elsewhere?
Metaphysical Realism:
Reality = That which is.
Since only That which is can either affirm or deny that there either is or is not That which is, there is That which is.
Ritual play, ritual behavior
Transframing
Sensibility Transcendence
Cognitive flexibility of ASC
Increased realness of world we’re trying to move into
Radical transformative experience
Salience landscape
Parasitic processing
Shared mythology