What books/articles/essays are you reading?
What books/articles/essays are you reading?
Just curious, whats on your menu currently?
-
Elizabeth Isabelle
- Posts: 3771
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am
Re: What books/articles/essays are you reading?
I finished Why they Kill by Richard Rhodes last night. I'm not quite sure what I'm going to read now.
I'm thinking about The Simpsons and Philosophy which should be a little lighter than the last subject.
I'm also reading Rabelais for class - or at least I will be starting on Thursday.
I'm thinking about The Simpsons and Philosophy which should be a little lighter than the last subject.
I'm also reading Rabelais for class - or at least I will be starting on Thursday.
-Katy
-
Trevor Salyzyn
- Posts: 2420
- Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 12:52 pm
- Location: Canada
I have read Gurdjieff before, and read much about him.hades wrote:what do you think of Gurdjieff so far? I've been meaning to check him out
He is the real deal, do check him out.
Yes. I was thinking about removing it, nobody here has their photo as their avatar, and what with this place turning out to be so incredibly hostile, I feel a bit unnecessarily exposed with it up... it has come up in conversation a few times in the short period I have been here, who else's avatar gets mentioned ever?hades wrote:also is that u in your avatar, or no?
-
Elizabeth Isabelle
- Posts: 3771
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am
When I first got here, I was accused of being a man posing as a female, and I was trying to prove that one could be feminine and thinking so I showed them a picture of me and got flamed for quite a while for it... The "Deconstructing the feminine" thread probably should have also been a clue that they don't want to look at females here.Leah wrote:Yes. I was thinking about removing it, nobody here has their photo as their avatar, and what with this place turning out to be so incredibly hostile, I feel a bit unnecessarily exposed with it up... it has come up in conversation a few times in the short period I have been here, who else's avatar gets mentioned ever?
At present I'm stalking Leah, basically looking for something to find fault with, or to determine the quality of her mind.
So I did a search of the book she mentioned.
Interesting.
Funny about the connection between Leah's book and Carls book, though he may only have commented because of the connection.
"In 1915 Gurdjieff met his most famous student, the man who, much more than Gurdjieff himself, would become the most widely-read exponent of the Fourth Way: Pyotr Demianovich Ouspensky (1878-1947). Ouspensky, a bespectacled mathematician preoccupied with the nature of the universe, had just come back from a journey from India to find hidden wisdom (which he had failed to do). He suspected Gurdjieff had the secrets he had been searching for"
But what is far more interesting from the article I found is this
What is this Fourth Way? Gurdjieff said there were three comparatively common ways to spiritual attainment: the way of the fakir, that is, the man who masters his physical organism to the point where he can, say, stand "motionless in the same position for hours, days, months, or years."2 The second is the way of the monk, the man who masters his emotions through prayer and devotional practices. The third way is the way of the yogi, the man who gains control of his mind.
Yet, Gurdjieff believed, none of these ways is complete in itself. A man, for example, may master his mind - he may genuinely know something - but may be incapable of putting it into action. Or his emotions may be developed, but his intellect may remain at a primitive state. To compound these difficulties, each of these first three ways requires withdrawal from the world, from day-to-day life.
Then there is the Fourth Way - "the way of the sly man." It does not require withdrawal from the world, but can be pursued in the midst of ordinary life. And instead of working with just the mind, the emotions, or the body, it works with all three. It is, Gurdjieff claimed, faster and more efficient than the other ways. "The 'sly man' knows the secret," said Gurdjieff, "and with its help outstrips the fakir, the monk, and the yogi."
This is precisely what I think comprehansive enlightenment can only be.
Ouspensky's account of his experiences is contained in what is perhaps the best and most famous book about the Gurdjieff Work: In Search of the Miraculous. In it Ouspensky presents an elaborate and fantastic esoteric system, emphasizing the mechanicalness of human behavior and how man, in his ordinary situation, cannot do anything; things happen to him. Man, in fact, is not even one consistent being: he is a stage on which a constant succession of different identities perform, each of them wanting and doing one thing one minute and another the next. By this view we are scarcely different from those cases of multiple identities recorded in psychiatric journals. Yet Gurdjieff also taught that man, by dint of intense work upon himself, can become a unified being, possessing will and consciousness and able to do in the real sense of the word.
In reading the article I started thinking Gurdjieff was the supreme actor, a complete two faced liar, but then I read this passage about Aleister Crowley.
"Mister, you go?" Gurdjieff inquired. Crowley assented. "You have been guest?" - a fact which the visitor could hardly deny. "Now you go, you are no longer guest?" Crowley - no doubt wondering whether his host had lost his grip on reality and was wandering in a semantic wilderness - humored his mood by indicating that he was on his way back to Paris. But Gurdjieff, having made the point that he was not violating the canons of hospitality, changed on the instant into the embodiment of righteous anger. "You filthy," he stormed, "you dirty inside! Never again you set foot in my house!" . . . Whitefaced and shaking, the Great Beast crept back to Paris with his tail between his legs.22
Love it! Crowley was an idiot, a wantabe guru who would use anything for his ego.
And the following bit can be applied to the QRS.
So possibly Gurdjieff took on the project of bringing certain ancient esoteric doctrines to overintellectualized Western man, for whom God is a nullity or an abstraction, and who can only appreciate such teachings if presented in a psychological or "scientific" cloak. If this was in fact his task, he was to devote his entire life to it.
Did he succeed? The difficulty of the Work, its inaccessibility to all but a tiny fraction of humankind, is admitted and even celebrated by its adherents. Yet, as Joel Friedlander's article in this issue shows, we find the teachings of Gurdjieff cropping up in the most unlikely places - in books on pop psychology, in corporate management classes, even on sneakers and key chains.
Gurdjieff himself, most likely, would have laughed at such attempts and branded them as counterfeits - as they may well be. And they point to a goal which Gurdjieff would have found ridiculous: the collective awakening of mankind. Gurdjieff, who believed human beings were on a low rung of an enormous cosmic food chain, did not think awakening was possible for any more than a few isolated individuals working together, who, like prisoners digging a tunnel, may be able to find a way out.
So I did a search of the book she mentioned.
Interesting.
Funny about the connection between Leah's book and Carls book, though he may only have commented because of the connection.
"In 1915 Gurdjieff met his most famous student, the man who, much more than Gurdjieff himself, would become the most widely-read exponent of the Fourth Way: Pyotr Demianovich Ouspensky (1878-1947). Ouspensky, a bespectacled mathematician preoccupied with the nature of the universe, had just come back from a journey from India to find hidden wisdom (which he had failed to do). He suspected Gurdjieff had the secrets he had been searching for"
But what is far more interesting from the article I found is this
What is this Fourth Way? Gurdjieff said there were three comparatively common ways to spiritual attainment: the way of the fakir, that is, the man who masters his physical organism to the point where he can, say, stand "motionless in the same position for hours, days, months, or years."2 The second is the way of the monk, the man who masters his emotions through prayer and devotional practices. The third way is the way of the yogi, the man who gains control of his mind.
Yet, Gurdjieff believed, none of these ways is complete in itself. A man, for example, may master his mind - he may genuinely know something - but may be incapable of putting it into action. Or his emotions may be developed, but his intellect may remain at a primitive state. To compound these difficulties, each of these first three ways requires withdrawal from the world, from day-to-day life.
Then there is the Fourth Way - "the way of the sly man." It does not require withdrawal from the world, but can be pursued in the midst of ordinary life. And instead of working with just the mind, the emotions, or the body, it works with all three. It is, Gurdjieff claimed, faster and more efficient than the other ways. "The 'sly man' knows the secret," said Gurdjieff, "and with its help outstrips the fakir, the monk, and the yogi."
This is precisely what I think comprehansive enlightenment can only be.
Ouspensky's account of his experiences is contained in what is perhaps the best and most famous book about the Gurdjieff Work: In Search of the Miraculous. In it Ouspensky presents an elaborate and fantastic esoteric system, emphasizing the mechanicalness of human behavior and how man, in his ordinary situation, cannot do anything; things happen to him. Man, in fact, is not even one consistent being: he is a stage on which a constant succession of different identities perform, each of them wanting and doing one thing one minute and another the next. By this view we are scarcely different from those cases of multiple identities recorded in psychiatric journals. Yet Gurdjieff also taught that man, by dint of intense work upon himself, can become a unified being, possessing will and consciousness and able to do in the real sense of the word.
In reading the article I started thinking Gurdjieff was the supreme actor, a complete two faced liar, but then I read this passage about Aleister Crowley.
"Mister, you go?" Gurdjieff inquired. Crowley assented. "You have been guest?" - a fact which the visitor could hardly deny. "Now you go, you are no longer guest?" Crowley - no doubt wondering whether his host had lost his grip on reality and was wandering in a semantic wilderness - humored his mood by indicating that he was on his way back to Paris. But Gurdjieff, having made the point that he was not violating the canons of hospitality, changed on the instant into the embodiment of righteous anger. "You filthy," he stormed, "you dirty inside! Never again you set foot in my house!" . . . Whitefaced and shaking, the Great Beast crept back to Paris with his tail between his legs.22
Love it! Crowley was an idiot, a wantabe guru who would use anything for his ego.
And the following bit can be applied to the QRS.
So possibly Gurdjieff took on the project of bringing certain ancient esoteric doctrines to overintellectualized Western man, for whom God is a nullity or an abstraction, and who can only appreciate such teachings if presented in a psychological or "scientific" cloak. If this was in fact his task, he was to devote his entire life to it.
Did he succeed? The difficulty of the Work, its inaccessibility to all but a tiny fraction of humankind, is admitted and even celebrated by its adherents. Yet, as Joel Friedlander's article in this issue shows, we find the teachings of Gurdjieff cropping up in the most unlikely places - in books on pop psychology, in corporate management classes, even on sneakers and key chains.
Gurdjieff himself, most likely, would have laughed at such attempts and branded them as counterfeits - as they may well be. And they point to a goal which Gurdjieff would have found ridiculous: the collective awakening of mankind. Gurdjieff, who believed human beings were on a low rung of an enormous cosmic food chain, did not think awakening was possible for any more than a few isolated individuals working together, who, like prisoners digging a tunnel, may be able to find a way out.
-
Greg Shantz
- Posts: 147
- Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2002 8:20 am
Concluding Unscientific Postscript to Philosophical Fragments by Kierkegaard, translated by Howard V. Hong
Henrik Ibsen The Complete Major Prose Plays translated by Rolf Fjelde
Encounters with Kierkegaard translated by Bruce Kirmmse and Virginia Laursen
The Female Offender by Cesare Lombroso and William Ferrero
Christian Discourses and The Lilly of the Field and the Birds of the Air and Three Discourses at the Communion on Fridays by Kierkegaard trans. Walter Lowrie
I'm also studying John's Gospel through the Waterloo University Bible Fellowship with my friend Andy and reading the Old Testament in the Authorized Version.
For novels, I recently finished Pan by Knut Hamsun and Rabbit is Rich by John Updike.
Henrik Ibsen The Complete Major Prose Plays translated by Rolf Fjelde
Encounters with Kierkegaard translated by Bruce Kirmmse and Virginia Laursen
The Female Offender by Cesare Lombroso and William Ferrero
Christian Discourses and The Lilly of the Field and the Birds of the Air and Three Discourses at the Communion on Fridays by Kierkegaard trans. Walter Lowrie
I'm also studying John's Gospel through the Waterloo University Bible Fellowship with my friend Andy and reading the Old Testament in the Authorized Version.
For novels, I recently finished Pan by Knut Hamsun and Rabbit is Rich by John Updike.
-
Diebert van Rhijn
- Posts: 6469
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm
I just finished Walker Percy's "The Second Coming" and started his other, "The Moviegoer."
In class, I am reading lots of selections from Plato, Socrates, Aristotle and others - beginner's philosophy. I find the later Plato remarkable. I have also read a little about Hinduism and Buddhism in this class, although it is a Western philosophy class. What strikes me most about Eastern philosophy is their take on finding reality by turning inward which is something I agree with rather than Western philosophy which looks outward toward science and observation. It is why I find Plato's theory of forms interesting.
Although I am keeping an "open mind", theistic Existentialism seems to be where I'm headed...so, I forsee some Soren Kierkegaard in my future, perhaps, and Sarvapelli Radhakrishnan, on the side to step outside my box. Has anyone ever read anything by Radhakrishnan? If so, what did you think about him?
In class, I am reading lots of selections from Plato, Socrates, Aristotle and others - beginner's philosophy. I find the later Plato remarkable. I have also read a little about Hinduism and Buddhism in this class, although it is a Western philosophy class. What strikes me most about Eastern philosophy is their take on finding reality by turning inward which is something I agree with rather than Western philosophy which looks outward toward science and observation. It is why I find Plato's theory of forms interesting.
Although I am keeping an "open mind", theistic Existentialism seems to be where I'm headed...so, I forsee some Soren Kierkegaard in my future, perhaps, and Sarvapelli Radhakrishnan, on the side to step outside my box. Has anyone ever read anything by Radhakrishnan? If so, what did you think about him?
-
Matt Gregory
- Posts: 1537
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:40 am
- Location: United States
.
Leah, I figure that bringing your face to this particular forum is like bringing alcohol to recovering alcoholics. Some are in various states of admitted 'powerlessness' or denial of powerlessness at all. And perhaps like alcoholics, some of them blame the substance itself (women), confusing this with their own desire for and lack of control over same. It's a kind of cause-and-effect regard that gives license to consciousness to cuddle up in its poor victimhood, and fall right back asleep.
Probably most of the men on this forum are not consciously mature enough yet to interface with women as people. Those are not able to see people at the other end of their long, critical telescopes, exclusively trained, and in directionally fatal error. In this, they self-fulfill their prophesy of women, expect nothing and get it. Around women, they can become exactly the idiots they self-become and descry. Like alcoholics, we have here in some the deeply wounded and recovering; in the rest (who fit this description), perhaps just the fearful, in any case, your face can't just be your face to many here,
too many.
.
btw, I'm (re)reading Charles Dickens' Great Expectations, no reasonable reasons
.
Leah, I figure that bringing your face to this particular forum is like bringing alcohol to recovering alcoholics. Some are in various states of admitted 'powerlessness' or denial of powerlessness at all. And perhaps like alcoholics, some of them blame the substance itself (women), confusing this with their own desire for and lack of control over same. It's a kind of cause-and-effect regard that gives license to consciousness to cuddle up in its poor victimhood, and fall right back asleep.
Probably most of the men on this forum are not consciously mature enough yet to interface with women as people. Those are not able to see people at the other end of their long, critical telescopes, exclusively trained, and in directionally fatal error. In this, they self-fulfill their prophesy of women, expect nothing and get it. Around women, they can become exactly the idiots they self-become and descry. Like alcoholics, we have here in some the deeply wounded and recovering; in the rest (who fit this description), perhaps just the fearful, in any case, your face can't just be your face to many here,
too many.
.
btw, I'm (re)reading Charles Dickens' Great Expectations, no reasonable reasons
.
-
Ryan Rudolph
- Posts: 2490
- Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:32 am
- Location: British Columbia, Canada
Pye, I disagree, it seems to me that most of the individuals in here that discuss the psychology differences between the sexes are not blaming one over the other. For the most part, it is just an honest inquiry.
like here for example, is an interesting article, it is written by a female author, and she goes into great detail as to why women as a whole have a much harder time reaching enlightenment compared to males.
The Challenge of Emptiness, Vimala Thakar on the Spiritual Emancipation of Women
by Shanti Adams
like here for example, is an interesting article, it is written by a female author, and she goes into great detail as to why women as a whole have a much harder time reaching enlightenment compared to males.
The Challenge of Emptiness, Vimala Thakar on the Spiritual Emancipation of Women
by Shanti Adams
-
Diebert van Rhijn
- Posts: 6469
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm
Then I'm glad you decided to stick around in such immature environment Pye! Lets just hope it's not due to some mother-complex ;)Pye wrote:Probably most of the men on this forum are not consciously mature enough yet to interface with women as people.
My own suspicion is that this is all a matter of growing pains: over-consciousness or over-sensitivity to the 'feminine'. I think it's quite common in biological men with a raised consciousness, they start bouncing between extreme attraction to and revolt at the femininity they now start to sense more acute in things, imagery first. All externally projected, then more internally. Only then they might get over the whole thing.
-
Cory Duchesne
- Posts: 2320
- Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:35 am
- Location: Canada
- Contact:
Thisarticle I found to be quite odd, strange, inspiring, and stimulating.
-
BMcGilly07
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 3:33 pm
Hey Matt,
I gave the Flower Ornament Sutra a go a couple of times. I would read 10-20 pages a night before falling asleep. While very monotonous, it seems that the book has nearly nothing to do with words in an analytical sense. Being paradoxical and full of bizarre imagery it leaves the discriminating faculties benumbed.
I find myself almost hypnotized in its rhythms, it's wholly unlike any other work in the Mahayana canon. Using repetition and high-minded concepts, it seems to propel one beyond the discriminating mind through to the absurd.
I gave the Flower Ornament Sutra a go a couple of times. I would read 10-20 pages a night before falling asleep. While very monotonous, it seems that the book has nearly nothing to do with words in an analytical sense. Being paradoxical and full of bizarre imagery it leaves the discriminating faculties benumbed.
I find myself almost hypnotized in its rhythms, it's wholly unlike any other work in the Mahayana canon. Using repetition and high-minded concepts, it seems to propel one beyond the discriminating mind through to the absurd.
-
Steven Coyle
Matt,
Ever heard of a band called "The Shins"?
"Oh! Inverted World" is the name of the album.
"Know Your Onion!" the song.
A psychedelic voyage.
http://www.subpop.com/assets/audio/2383.mp3
Ever heard of a band called "The Shins"?
"Oh! Inverted World" is the name of the album.
"Know Your Onion!" the song.
A psychedelic voyage.
http://www.subpop.com/assets/audio/2383.mp3
-
Matt Gregory
- Posts: 1537
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:40 am
- Location: United States
That's pretty cool. Nope, never heard of them.Steven Coyle wrote:Matt,
Ever heard of a band called "The Shins"?
"Oh! Inverted World" is the name of the album.
"Know Your Onion!" the song.
A psychedelic voyage.
http://www.subpop.com/assets/audio/2383.mp3
Here's my favorite psychedelic voyage: Nuggets!
-
Matt Gregory
- Posts: 1537
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:40 am
- Location: United States
Yeah, I didn't mean to put it down or anything. I was just being silly.Bryan McGilly wrote:Hey Matt,
I gave the Flower Ornament Sutra a go a couple of times. I would read 10-20 pages a night before falling asleep. While very monotonous, it seems that the book has nearly nothing to do with words in an analytical sense. Being paradoxical and full of bizarre imagery it leaves the discriminating faculties benumbed.
I find myself almost hypnotized in its rhythms, it's wholly unlike any other work in the Mahayana canon. Using repetition and high-minded concepts, it seems to propel one beyond the discriminating mind through to the absurd.
I think it was written with a certain psychological awareness that enables the reader to have a firm grip on the main ideas by just casually reading through it. I think it's really interesting.