Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
User avatar
Kelly Jones
Posts: 2665
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by Kelly Jones »

Okay, thanks for the honest replies, Jupta. I think that probably establishes that it is difficult, generally, to get as far in everyday conversation on philosophical topics, as one may do through "vehicles", like books or essays and the like. Sure, one can have an "influence", but it's not going far, for the reason I mentioned: everyday life and the way most people structure it, makes no room for spirituality.

At least in reading, the intended reader can take their time privately to consider thoughtfully and to argue with themselves over the ideas therein, without the same degree of conversational pressure from face-to-face interactions. They have themselves made a bit of room, in a mental realm apart from everyday life. Then they can be drawn to make more such spaces, until they come to a decision about turning their entire lives over, and making wisdom the everyday.

To be able to talk about women truthfully, in a philosophical sense, is the acid test. If you can't do that, you are too far away from touching the philosopher's stone.

KJ: Do I sacrifice my own preference for a quiet life in order to quicken this project's benefit to others, or is the sacrifice too great and actually short-sighted?

J: I don't see why a quiet life should be considered a requirement for philosophical growth. It could easily be a hindrance.
It depends on how you define "quiet".

Enough chat. Let's see some sparks.


.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Its empty and meaningless that its empty and meaningless.

uproar!
Leyla Shen
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by Leyla Shen »

jupiviv :
The nature of the how is based on a lot of things, like the conditions of social organisation that may potentially replace the existing ones.
Yes. The nature of the how is based on a non-existent state of conditions that might replace the existent ones—sort of like, just out of nowhere and having no relation to its predecessor conditions...
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but you seem to be saying that everything that a human being does within society has a special, isolated causal relationship with society. You're confusing causation with identity. Just because A is caused by B doesn't mean that A == B(in fact, it means the opposite : A != B.)
I was referring to collective human activity; the way in which, as estranged as it may be, humans participate systematically in order to create any given society economically/productively, and within which all intellectual enterprises and ideologies, as well as their dialectical opposites, arise and are perpetuated or revolutionised.
Assuming that 'Woman' means the whole of human society, your logic here dictates that the human race can't go outside the earth because it is currently located on Earth and gains its sustenance from it.
Sorry, I don’t see how that necessarily follows.
LS: Yes, it is conditioned exactly by Woman; modern society. Your Thinker’s Estate/commune is a freedom which no genius seems to have required in the past, why do you call for one now?

j: What are you talking about? Were the Zen Buddhists in Japan a secret gay club? Were the first universities in Europe built for fun? The reason we have so few geniuses is because that freedom was, and is, lacking.
?

How does that conclusion follow from the premises?
According to this logic, any idea of "fuel essence" which is independent of currently available fuels is essentially delusional.
More like, any idea of fuel essence which is independent of fuel science is essentially delusional.
Between Suicides
Leyla Shen
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by Leyla Shen »

Kelly Jones wrote:Anything you are working on, Leyla, or any wild ideas?
I think, Kelly, I haven't thought about it seriously enough. With the regular people I meet in daily life (work colleagues and family), I challenge their religious and other ideological values all the time. I actually can't help myself! I did quite a bit in that area on Facebook for a bit and was consequently deleted and/or severely reprimanded by members from all quarters of my family (near and far), and a bunch of so-called socialists/communists, too! So, I don't think it will be too long before I turn to a more formal written exposition under a pseudonym. Under a pseudonym not because I have anything to lose, but because I have nothing to gain from it.

Not really the regular blog or youtube type.
Between Suicides
User avatar
jupiviv
Posts: 2282
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 6:48 pm

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by jupiviv »

Leyla Shen wrote:jupiviv :
The nature of the how is based on a lot of things, like the conditions of social organisation that may potentially replace the existing ones.
Yes. The nature of the how is based on a non-existent state of conditions that might replace the existent ones—sort of like, just out of nowhere and having no relation to its predecessor conditions...
No one says they can arise out of nowhere, but they could be very dissimilar to the existing conditions, and would not be caused by them in a special, isolated way.
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but you seem to be saying that everything that a human being does within society has a special, isolated causal relationship with society. You're confusing causation with identity. Just because A is caused by B doesn't mean that A == B(in fact, it means the opposite : A != B.)
I was referring to collective human activity; the way in which, as estranged as it may be, humans participate systematically in order to create any given society economically/productively, and within which all intellectual enterprises and ideologies, as well as their dialectical opposites, arise and are perpetuated or revolutionised.
So any activity any human performs inherently belongs in the category "collective human activity" and is utterly meaningless beyond it? As a purely logical construction that could be valid, but not in the sense Marx used it.
Assuming that 'Woman' means the whole of human society, your logic here dictates that the human race can't go outside the earth because it is currently located on Earth and gains its sustenance from it.
Sorry, I don’t see how that necessarily follows.

It does follow. You're essentially saying that, because we are sustained and conditioned in a direct, physical way by human society, it is logically impossible for us to part with it or even act outside it.
LS: Yes, it is conditioned exactly by Woman; modern society. Your Thinker’s Estate/commune is a freedom which no genius seems to have required in the past, why do you call for one now?

j: What are you talking about? Were the Zen Buddhists in Japan a secret gay club? Were the first universities in Europe built for fun? The reason we have so few geniuses is because that freedom was, and is, lacking.
?

How does that conclusion follow from the premises?

I assumed you were saying that creating congregations of people dedicated to enlightenment wouldn't do anything to foster it.
According to this logic, any idea of "fuel essence" which is independent of currently available fuels is essentially delusional.
More like, any idea of fuel essence which is independent of fuel science is essentially delusional.
So fuel science covers every possible kind of fuel, fuel source, fuel extraction/generation method, fuel shortage, etc.? Again, it could make sense as an abstract logical category, but not as a special statement about the nature of fuel.
Last edited by jupiviv on Mon Nov 11, 2013 3:24 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Cory Duchesne
Posts: 2320
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:35 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by Cory Duchesne »

Kelly Jones wrote: What are your ideas on how to ignite the world-burning fire, that drives people to cross the river of philosophy, and reach the other shore? How would you make the spiritual life visible in today's world, in a practical and down-to-earth sense?
Kelly, I think you'll be genuinely useful for criticizing the things you don't like, so that I can find a more creative and functional way of protecting the things you're trying to eliminate.
User avatar
Kelly Jones
Posts: 2665
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by Kelly Jones »

I think Leyla's mistakenly equivocating two different meanings of "society": (1) any group of individuals, (2) the egotistical forms of socialising.

(1) can abandon (2), and then it doesn't have the same drives and values as the group (2). It becomes a loosely-knit group of individuals seeking wisdom.

And, it can try to help some of those in the second group. Still, it's not identical with them or their values or methods.
User avatar
Kelly Jones
Posts: 2665
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by Kelly Jones »

Leyla Shen wrote:KJ: Anything you are working on, Leyla, or any wild ideas?

LS: I think, Kelly, I haven't thought about it seriously enough. With the regular people I meet in daily life (work colleagues and family), I challenge their religious and other ideological values all the time. I actually can't help myself! I did quite a bit in that area on Facebook for a bit and was consequently deleted and/or severely reprimanded by members from all quarters of my family (near and far), and a bunch of so-called socialists/communists, too! So, I don't think it will be too long before I turn to a more formal written exposition under a pseudonym. Under a pseudonym not because I have anything to lose, but because I have nothing to gain from it.

Not really the regular blog or youtube type.
If you will consider some advice, I think you should use your real name. Pseudonyms are basically anonymous, and I think play a big role in cyber-bullying. So many people use them, that it creates a culture of fear. It's makes for a culture of ghost-like, sub-real people. And it distances people with good intentions, since they cannot contact you to answer their questions.

And, another one: I hope your formal written exposition will be simple and clear. If you are aiming to help people to change some of their ideas, then no ambiguities. That Feuerbach quote, for instance, was terrible. Undefined terms can't be used to draw a conclusion, so it was virtually meaningless as posted.

How about posting ideas you are working on in a thread, as a practice?


.
Leyla Shen
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by Leyla Shen »

Kelly Jones wrote:I think Leyla's mistakenly equivocating two different meanings of "society": (1) any group of individuals, (2) the egotistical forms of socialising.
No, I don't think I have. I have already defined the term as the productive/economic foundation of any group of individuals (primary or secondary).
Between Suicides
Leyla Shen
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by Leyla Shen »

That Feuerbach quote, for instance, was terrible. Undefined terms can't be used to draw a conclusion, so it was virtually meaningless as posted.
I'll get back to this!
Between Suicides
User avatar
Kelly Jones
Posts: 2665
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by Kelly Jones »

Leyla Shen wrote:
Kelly Jones wrote:I think Leyla's mistakenly equivocating two different meanings of "society": (1) any group of individuals, (2) the egotistical forms of socialising.
No, I don't think I have. I have already defined the term as the productive/economic foundation of any group of individuals (primary or secondary).
Then why do you call it "Woman"? Wise individuals can be productive and trade with others without feminine drives. It's even possible for them to use such activities to reduce the egotistical, consumeristic, feminine-minded drives of those who aren't wise. They can negotiate without greed, and by their behaviour discourage greedy or short-sighted responses.

For instance, someone might read a short story by Chuang Tzu, and realise the decision they were considering, to get a respectable job, was simply vanity. Chuang Tzu in that instance has moved them to become a genuinely productive individual, instead of a spiritual vandal.


.
Leyla Shen
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by Leyla Shen »

Then why do you call it "Woman"?
Because I see “Woman” as the culmination of modern (capitalist) society itself; as the embodiment of estrangement. An entire system of economy predicated on the broken backs of “men” paid on the basis of subsistence wages for nothing more substantial than sheer muscle power, and “women” bucket loads for their reflection; their looks. These things, and not wisdom, for example, are at the very heart of cumulative wealth in capitalist society.
Wise individuals can be productive and trade with others without feminine drives.
Well, that’s a logically consistent statement given all the right definitions, no?
It's even possible for them to use such activities to reduce the egotistical, consumeristic, feminine-minded drives of those who aren't wise.
I don’t think I was arguing that wisdom was impossible. I’m sure that if anything I've said seems to imply that, it’ll come up again, however.
They can negotiate without greed, and by their behaviour discourage greedy or short-sighted responses.
Sure. But the larger point I’m trying to make here is the reality of a dominant, materially existing system of socio-economics. The one the majority of people are mindlessly, and sometimes without alternative even, engaged in perpetuating. Any variations or changes—revolutions—have necessarily occurred from ruminations occurring within the prevailing system of economics and production of life and living; occurring against it—a dialectical opposition to it which fails or succeeds in varying degrees. The Paris Commune is a famous example of that, even if their aim was not to nurture wisdom for wisdom’s sake. Although, they were remorselessly slaughtered for it.
For instance, someone might read a short story by Chuang Tzu, and realise the decision they were considering, to get a respectable job, was simply vanity. Chuang Tzu in that instance has moved them to become a genuinely productive individual, instead of a spiritual vandal.
And how long ago did Chuang Tzu live? (: Two thousand and thirteen years later and still no second coming, either.

Again, I am not saying this to diminish any such achievement by, or reject the possibility for, an individual. It is simply to highlight the material reality one is actually dealing with, rising up against.
Between Suicides
Leyla Shen
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by Leyla Shen »

Kelly Jones wrote:If you will consider some advice, I think you should use your real name. Pseudonyms are basically anonymous, and I think play a big role in cyber-bullying. So many people use them, that it creates a culture of fear. It's makes for a culture of ghost-like, sub-real people. And it distances people with good intentions, since they cannot contact you to answer their questions.
I was thinking of a fairly ordinary and unthreatening pseudonym and it's easy enough to set up an email account. Any genuine interest can flourish from there.

I understand your point, though.
Kelly Jones wrote:And, another one: I hope your formal written exposition will be simple and clear. If you are aiming to help people to change some of their ideas, then no ambiguities. That Feuerbach quote, for instance, was terrible. Undefined terms can't be used to draw a conclusion, so it was virtually meaningless as posted.


Lol Kelly. But I love that quote! (:

Nevertheless, I am not entirely in disagreement. I spent a lot of time reading Marx, mostly because one cannot possibly understand him without having a sufficient grasp of all the writers he was arguing against. And this is exactly the problem. So, this conversation has served to bring that back into focus for me. I've really only just pulled away for reflection from what I spent a good deal of personal commitment getting into. I don't say that with any real regret, though. One hardly ever gets exactly what one bargains for, so every journey always starts with a certain degree of faith and a strong sense of adventure!

I will, of course, make sure its properly edited.
Between Suicides
User avatar
Kelly Jones
Posts: 2665
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by Kelly Jones »

Leyla Shen wrote:KJ: I think Leyla's mistakenly equivocating two different meanings of "society": (1) any group of individuals, (2) the egotistical forms of socialising.

LS: No, I don't think I have. I have already defined the term as the productive/economic foundation of any group of individuals (primary or secondary).

KJ: Then why do you call it "Woman"?

LS: Because I see “Woman” as the culmination of modern (capitalist) society itself; as the embodiment of estrangement. An entire system of economy predicated on the broken backs of “men” paid on the basis of subsistence wages for nothing more substantial than sheer muscle power, and “women” bucket loads for their reflection; their looks. These things, and not wisdom, for example, are at the very heart of cumulative wealth in capitalist society.
Since you agree a wise group of individuals aren't driven by "Woman", why did you regard any group of individuals being productive, as "Woman"?

KJ: Wise individuals can be productive and trade with others without feminine drives. It's even possible for them to use such activities to reduce the egotistical, consumeristic, feminine-minded drives of those who aren't wise. They can negotiate without greed, and by their behaviour discourage greedy or short-sighted responses.

LS: Sure. But the larger point I’m trying to make here is the reality of a dominant, materially existing system of socio-economics. The one the majority of people are mindlessly, and sometimes without alternative even, engaged in perpetuating. Any variations or changes—revolutions—have necessarily occurred from ruminations occurring within the prevailing system of economics and production of life and living; occurring against it—a dialectical opposition to it which fails or succeeds in varying degrees. The Paris Commune is a famous example of that, even if their aim was not to nurture wisdom for wisdom’s sake. Although, they were remorselessly slaughtered for it.
If there is only a single person who is wise, who helps one other person, and now there is a "group", it is still not apparent to me why you'd call this group "Woman".

It seems you'd take that stance, because you're more interested in socio-economics or politics than in wisdom. That makes you see everything through the lens, even though it's irrational to do so. And I can't perceive why you find Marx appealing, especially given "one cannot possibly understand him without having a sufficient grasp of all the writers he was arguing against." If he can't speak in terms of simple universal principles, then he's not providing fundamental solutions. He's out of touch with Reality itself, skimming on the outskirts.

KJ: For instance, someone might read a short story by Chuang Tzu, and realise the decision they were considering, to get a respectable job, was simply vanity. Chuang Tzu in that instance has moved them to become a genuinely productive individual, instead of a spiritual vandal.

LS: And how long ago did Chuang Tzu live? (: Two thousand and thirteen years later and still no second coming, either.

Again, I am not saying this to diminish any such achievement by, or reject the possibility for, an individual. It is simply to highlight the material reality one is actually dealing with, rising up against.
Eternal truths don't change, Leyla. Chuang Tzu, Hakuin, and more recently, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Camille Paglia and even Bukowski all made the same basic remark about what happens when "form appears", i.e., materialism manifests strongly. The burgeoning of superficial abundance, is always a sign that the spirit has faded.

So what we are seeing now is a very stale, old phenomenon about decadence emerging when virtues are lost. One can't solve it by ignoring the core cause. And it certainly won't be overcome using its own illness (the desire for might, the hugger-mugger political power of mobs).

It is indicative of this problem, that you focussed on the "Thinkers' Estates", for instance. The intellectual stimulants were totally passed over, and yet they are certainly more powerful tools for spiritual growth.


.
User avatar
jupiviv
Posts: 2282
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 6:48 pm

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by jupiviv »

Leyla Shen wrote:Because I see “Woman” as the culmination of modern (capitalist) society itself; as the embodiment of estrangement. An entire system of economy predicated on the broken backs of “men” paid on the basis of subsistence wages for nothing more substantial than sheer muscle power, and “women” bucket loads for their reflection; their looks. These things, and not wisdom, for example, are at the very heart of cumulative wealth in capitalist society.

It seems your primary goal for posting on this forum is to either repeat what others are saying or point out things that everybody already knows or assumes to begin with.
One hardly ever gets exactly what one bargains for, so every journey always starts with a certain degree of faith and a strong sense of adventure!

Well, you can't qualify for an AHS-9 without donating at least a couple of million to the Medicloreans For Toddlers fund.
Leyla Shen
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA

Fire?

Post by Leyla Shen »

Hm. Yes, well... if, just to give one example from the Genius treatment above, answering a question with the obvious after having made a statement without explaining the obvious because you assumed it was obvious, is simply being at this forum to state the obvious--then, yes, it does appear by virtue of the Next Generation that I had much less potential for Genius than I thought the first time*.

*Sorry, just to state the obvious: by this I mean with the First Generation.
Between Suicides
User avatar
jupiviv
Posts: 2282
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 6:48 pm

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by jupiviv »

Leyla Shen wrote:Yes, well... if, just to give one example from the Genius treatment above, answering a question with the obvious after having made a statement without explaining the obvious because you assumed it was obvious

I didn't assume that it was by itself obvious that enlightened congregations do not foster enlightenment, but that you (not necessarily obviously) seem to think so. And the reason I did was because your statement - Your Thinker’s Estate/commune is a freedom which no genius seems to have required in the past, why do you call for one now? - can be interpreted to mean little else than that you do think so [either you think that there are/have been enough geniuses even without that freedom, so regardless of whether it might/mightn't have helped them, it's not necessary to create it now (which is an opinion irrelevant to a discussion about whether such freedom can be created), or you think that according to the historical evidence, geniuses don't need such a thing at all.] In fact, you still haven't clarified if you do or not, so if you don't mind please do.

Anyways, I was referring specifically to the fact that you have seemingly taken issue with Kelly's idea of a congregation of sages because of "the reality of a dominant, materially existing system of socio-economics", the existence of which no one has denied (in fact I myself affirmed it in an earlier post). Also, you still haven't explained why it is logically impossible for someone to get out of such a system, and hence be necessarily deluded even in contemplating it.
User avatar
Kelly Jones
Posts: 2665
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by Kelly Jones »

I'm going to use a shorter word: gynic, or gynist, to refer to feminine-minded traits. So, capitalism isn't the essence of gynist society. Nor is communism, or any other economic system. Whether one person is said to possess a thing that another person values, or more than one person, or even an entire society is said to, has absolutely no relationship to their quality of mind. It's only where an overwhelming majority of people in a society are ignorant of the actual way things exist, that it's gynist.

Gynism is an absolute principle, not a scientific one. It's not necessarily tied to any biological sex. The label is used to match the concept with the feminine sex's psychology on earth, because that demonstrates it far better than anything else known to us.

Trying to convert everyone to communism won't deal with gynism. It will actually suppress the problem, as well as censoring individual freedom of thought, by forcing equality and demands for equal participation, quite against any individual wishes. For example, say one individual wished to dedicate his entire life to spiritual productivity, and chose to do so by living like Diogenes. Most of the others would probably disagree that this was a useful contribution to the group, and try to "correct" him by throwing him into gaol, cutting off his supplies, making life more difficult for him, and so on. So you see, it's essentially still gynocracy. At least in a capitalist system, individualistic eccentrics are permitted to follow their own lights. I'm not saying either aren't gynic; just irrelevant to this thread.

If you wish to explore a non-gynic society, and how it is structured, you need to focus purely on how a wise individual thinks. That will show you.

So, I wouldn't take Leyla's statement as assumed or obvious at all. It's not true.

Leyla, if you wish to persist with the focus on socioeconomic systems, and not focussing 100% on how a wise individual lives, can you start a new thread? That discussion doesn't belong here. If you think it does, then please make your arguments clearly.


.
Leyla Shen
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by Leyla Shen »

Kelly Jones wrote:
Leyla, if you wish to persist with the focus on socioeconomic systems, and not focussing 100% on how a wise individual lives, can you start a new thread? That discussion doesn't belong here. If you think it does, then please make your arguments clearly.
I could do that, of course. If that was what I wished.

But, strangely, it appears to me that in the course of this discussion you already answered this question:
L: Here's a question. Why don't you, jupiviv, Diebert, David, etc, get together on that block of land, for example? You could then foster and fortify what you already have without living with the day-to-day distractions of society?

K: Jupta is in India, Diebert is in the Netherlands (I think), and David is in northern Australia, so it doesn't seem feasible for them to move to Tasmania. Anyway, you're missing the point altogether. It's not for those who are already at ease with their rejection of Woman, but for those who are in great distress because of it, right?
So I’m personally satisfied that the question in the OP has been sufficiently addressed and couldn't possibly proceed further in any meaningful sense true to itself.
Between Suicides
User avatar
Kelly Jones
Posts: 2665
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by Kelly Jones »

Okay, but no solutions for the disadvantages of the Thinkers' Estates have been raised as yet.

Some ideas on ways to overcome the "lack of a stumbling block", the lack of that direct individual conflict with gynic society, which the TE's might fall prey to? Or living in close proximity to others, perpetuating the need for "safety in numbers" --- a deep egotistical instinct?
User avatar
Kelly Jones
Posts: 2665
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Wince TV

Post by Kelly Jones »

Project idea: Wince TV

The same eye-watering sarcasm of America's Finest News Source, The Onion. But in the case of Wince TV, it's about sensationalised irrationality of a philosophical kind, instead of hyped-up but extremely banal news stores.

Straightforwardly silly, like A Bit of Fry and Laurie, and Monty Python. The aim is to get the silliness of an idea across, not distract the viewer with special effects.

Some examples:

- Talking-head at the news desk announces a global prize-winning science ceremony, and transitions to live coverage. We hear the news reporter asking, "So what did you win the prize for?" An excited, well-dressed scientist says, "We finally discovered the smallest particle!" News reporter: "Wow! Finally! So what will you do with the $1.3 million prize money?" The response, "Oh, more research of course. The particle has several even tinier floating components, and we don't know anything about these."


- Talking-head at the news desk announces a notable religious charity event, with a big smile. A news reporter is pictured walking through an eatery for the homeless, and asks a priest dressed in expensive velvet and silk cassock, standing by, "What's the charity event in aid of?" He replies, "Jesus said, Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the Kingdom. Today we have some of the city's leading business men, dining with us, learning how the poor live. We're eating some humble pie, and learning from our poorest brethren how to inherit the Kingdom." He turns and shakes the hand of a business man. He grins and nods, and says, "See you for golf tomorrow, Chuck. And Jill said to drop in afterwards for some drinks."


- Talking-head: "Teachers around the nation are holding a 'Think for Yourself Day'. Part of the new federal Initiatives for Literacy Program, John has the report.
Reporter: [Entering a quiet classroom. In a hushed voice.] "Children here are engaged in a thinking session. Today is "Think for Yourself Day". Ah, the session is finished, and a child is reporting their thoughts.
School-child: "I was thinking about what Ms. Banrock said to us yesterday, when talking about thinking. She said all correct thinking uses logic. When Martin asked what logic is, she said, "It's what mathematicians and scientists use to come up with correct answers." Then Martin asked: "But what if you're not a mathematician or a scientist, can you still do correct thinking?" She said, "It's not as good." But she's not a mathematician or a scientist, so she can't be doing correct thinking."
Ms. Banrock: [To news-reporter) Children have such clear, simple minds!


- Talking-head: "We're celebrating the 70th anniversary of Woman's Thought magazine, the leading feminist journal in the US. More from Jessica."
Reporter: [To an elderly lady over coffee.] "What do you think of Woman's Thought?"
Woman: "Well, originally there were a lot of long essays, but it improved over time. Now it's very useful. There are so many good tips: how to paint your nails, where to buy shoes, how to tell whether your man is in a money-spending mood or not, how to get even more sexual pleasure, that sort of thing. I can't live without it!"



And so on.

Just short and snappy. Less than 3 minutes a piece.

A Youtube channel for multiple contributers. It'd be good to have the same talking-head at the desk, for recognisability.

Anyone interested?


.
Cold Cave
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Aug 26, 2013 9:56 am

Re: Wince TV

Post by Cold Cave »

Kelly Jones wrote:Project idea: Wince TV

The same eye-watering sarcasm of America's Finest News Source, The Onion. But in the case of Wince TV, it's about sensationalised irrationality of a philosophical kind, instead of hyped-up but extremely banal news stores.

Straightforwardly silly, like A Bit of Fry and Laurie, and Monty Python. The aim is to get the silliness of an idea across, not distract the viewer with special effects.

Some examples:

- Talking-head at the news desk announces a global prize-winning science ceremony, and transitions to live coverage. We hear the news reporter asking, "So what did you win the prize for?" An excited, well-dressed scientist says, "We finally discovered the smallest particle!" News reporter: "Wow! Finally! So what will you do with the $1.3 million prize money?" The response, "Oh, more research of course. The particle has several even tinier floating components, and we don't know anything about these."


- Talking-head at the news desk announces a notable religious charity event, with a big smile. A news reporter is pictured walking through an eatery for the homeless, and asks a priest dressed in expensive velvet and silk cassock, standing by, "What's the charity event in aid of?" He replies, "Jesus said, Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the Kingdom. Today we have some of the city's leading business men, dining with us, learning how the poor live. We're eating some humble pie, and learning from our poorest brethren how to inherit the Kingdom." He turns and shakes the hand of a business man. He grins and nods, and says, "See you for golf tomorrow, Chuck. And Jill said to drop in afterwards for some drinks."


- Talking-head: "Teachers around the nation are holding a 'Think for Yourself Day'. Part of the new federal Initiatives for Literacy Program, John has the report.
Reporter: [Entering a quiet classroom. In a hushed voice.] "Children here are engaged in a thinking session. Today is "Think for Yourself Day". Ah, the session is finished, and a child is reporting their thoughts.
School-child: "I was thinking about what Ms. Banrock said to us yesterday, when talking about thinking. She said all correct thinking uses logic. When Martin asked what logic is, she said, "It's what mathematicians and scientists use to come up with correct answers." Then Martin asked: "But what if you're not a mathematician or a scientist, can you still do correct thinking?" She said, "It's not as good." But she's not a mathematician or a scientist, so she can't be doing correct thinking."
Ms. Banrock: [To news-reporter) Children have such clear, simple minds!


- Talking-head: "We're celebrating the 70th anniversary of Woman's Thought magazine, the leading feminist journal in the US. More from Jessica."
Reporter: [To an elderly lady over coffee.] "What do you think of Woman's Thought?"
Woman: "Well, originally there were a lot of long essays, but it improved over time. Now it's very useful. There are so many good tips: how to paint your nails, where to buy shoes, how to tell whether your man is in a money-spending mood or not, how to get even more sexual pleasure, that sort of thing. I can't live without it!"



And so on.

Just short and snappy. Less than 3 minutes a piece.

A Youtube channel for multiple contributers. It'd be good to have the same talking-head at the desk, for recognisability.

Anyone interested?


.

This would be fun. Nothing like comedy to sneak up on people with truth.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

Kelly Jones wrote:What are your ideas on how to ignite the world-burning fire, that drives people to cross the river of philosophy, and reach the other shore? How would you make the spiritual life visible in today's world, in a practical and down-to-earth sense?

Let's hear them: your brainstorming, your pluck-them-out-of-your-wildest-imagination-type-ideas. Don't dig it into practicalities and logistics just yet. If you like, post your reasons behind these ideas. Later, we can look into their practical development, for on-the-ground projects. For now, I am keen to hear possibilities, or impossibilities even, if you get my drift.
You can make something visible only by asking people to open their eyes but people have many reasons for keeping their eyes shut: the securities of illusions. It seems you're looking for ways to crack some light into some skulls. Perhaps a more psychological approach is needed here, delving into the actual mechanics of how the blocking of most of the obvious light happens and then address those mechanics. Possibly art used to have that function before it became narcissistic or spectacle driven entertainment. But even the distribution of ideas seems to have gone that route.

Forum "life" at Genius and elsewhere has taught me a lot about how people construct and defend their delusions. It's commonly learned inside the debates, especially as participant, even within debates which aren't really debates but read more like mudslinging or ego competitions. For me they rarely were just that and I've been mapping many halls of mirrors and I learned a lot that way about tactics and strategy of words and their meanings. But what's a word? A distilled thought. What's a thought? A distilled form of life. But the linkage is fading and discourse is becoming rapidly meaningless, like a still life or even a still born.

But then the step to take these insights -- which are more psychological than philosophical -- and apply them outside this forum is something else. Just take a quick walk around town and engage with a few people about deeper themes or just observe their doings and suddenly you realize how really random and confused people generally are. That was also the suggested usage of the genius forum so far: not as elevated place but as "street emulation". If you can't make an argument here, forget putting the message elsewhere in what's bound to become a way more muddled and noisier environment.

Personally I haven't much faith in the language of video. Those projects seem a step down in effectiveness as such medium would confirm more than challenge the illusion (of "watching" for example). The venue I'm looking at (and testing) currently lies more in newer forms of interaction in which the innovation of some "disruptive" technology could be the way. What is needed first is a profound understanding of psychology and how any succesfull disruption does not cause more harm and delusion than it proclaims to challenge. And nothing illegal of course.

Before one can discuss particular strategies however, a call to "know the deluded mind" has to be issued. One needs to be a greater physiologist and psychologist than a Nietzsche, a Kierkegaard, a Freud and a Jung combined. "Before me there was no psychology at all" -- Nietzsche in Ecco Homo
User avatar
Kelly Jones
Posts: 2665
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by Kelly Jones »

Before one can discuss particular strategies however, a call to "know the deluded mind" has to be issued. One needs to be a greater physiologist and psychologist than a Nietzsche, a Kierkegaard, a Freud and a Jung combined. "Before me there was no psychology at all" -- Nietzsche in Ecco Homo
If you'd like to assimilate your experiences and thoughts, perhaps starting with explorations into wise psychology, and then to a straightforward account of the main problems with the deluded mind, I would be glad to have your exposition posted at Men of the Infinite.

I think you can be a lot more productive, Diebert, if you put the Genius Forum behind you. It's dead.

The "QRS" trio aren't going to be around forever. Two have chronic, painful, and incurable illnesses, a close associate is in the same situation, and all of them are showing or have mentioned the signs of the dying: like, can't go without sleep, injuries take much longer to heal, bodies breaking down. It's unreasonable to expect this place to be vibrant. Old age doesn't have the energy of the young. I think it's time to move on.

While Youtube video outreach might seem a degenerate format, the majority of young people on earth today are in that mentality. If you want to resist that degenerate future, then you definitely need to be on the front-line. And, if it's learning about deluded psychologies, you've got a far wider range, many of them far more literate and eloquent than you get here. Check out StarDusk's vids, for instance. There's more potent insight into men's psychological addiction to women there, than we've seen on the Genius Forum for many months. There is actual life to be found on the planet, Zeus be praised!

Come over to the forum, and let's talk.

See you round.


.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Projects for: "I have come to start a fire..."

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

Kelly Jones wrote:I think you can be a lot more productive, Diebert, if you put the Genius Forum behind you. It's dead.
You assume it's in front of me. Why would that have such meaning for others I then wonder? Perhaps the place it has in your thought, positively or negatively is something to question? I'm not that concerned about any "QRS" trio. When I joined this forum I didn't know of their existence or output for a while. So their disappearance or change in activities mean just as little to me now.
And, if it's learning about deluded psychologies, you've got a far wider range, many of them far more literate and eloquent than you get here. Check out StarDusk's vids, for instance. There's more potent insight into men's psychological addiction to women there, than we've seen on the Genius Forum for many months. There is actual life to be found on the planet, Zeus be praised!
There always have been many places where people with insight dwell and are employing activities. You are again implying this forum has some special significance somewhere. To me it always was just one venue out of several with a couple of interesting elements and people. One element is the attraction the forum had on certain psychologies which might be called disorders. But that attraction is also its downside. The relation between mental of physical dysfunction and philosophy has not been given much thought in the discussions while there can be no doubt Nietzsche (brain tumor?), Weiniger (suicidal depression?) or even Kierkegaard (temporal lobe epilepsy?) were not showcases of health. And yet this theme runs like a red line through the forum, from all the "insane and psychologically disturbed contributions" that you mentioned in your first post combined with the diagnoses and classifications, treated or untreated, justified or not, which many regulars including admins have admitted to. One would almost think that only a certain amount of mental disturbance or some peculiar affliction can ever lead to deeper insights.
Come over to the forum, and let's talk.
You ask me to leave a dying forum to join a dead, possibly stillborn one? No thanks. I don't think you understand the underlying forum problem and that you're still emulating ideas of others too much by going that direction. Do you want to improve on Kevin's activities: having a phpBB forum, a website with translations and articles, creating explanatory video's and so on? You are doing a very good job but I do wonder if it doesn't show a lack of individualization when it comes to formulating ones own wisdom and way.
Locked