Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
Isaac
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:49 am

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by Isaac »

Alex Jacob wrote: The focus is on Kevin and Dan.
Why not David, too? I should have mentioned Dan in my last post - but there's less personal information about him.
Religion, sex, power, money---so many things---can be used as a foil for our neurosis. It is questionable if what comes out of that process is valuable, but there is the metaphor of the irritating bit of sand that an oyster turns into a pearl. Everyone has to deal with the social sickness that is rampant, but everything hinges on how one addresses that social sickness.
To me the solution is art, entertainment, sports and science.

Ordinary, untalented people should learn to pride themselves in doing some valuable necessary labor, and in their free time, they should be content with playing sports, games, watching entertainment, art and science.
Isaac
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:49 am

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by Isaac »

David Quinn wrote:
Isaac wrote:In other words - a mild depression.
Well, this implies a constancy of mood that wasn't really there. In reality, I was all over the place with my moods during those days - sometimes overwhelmed and in despair, sometimes light and mentally-powerful, sometimes boisterous and intoxicated with possibilities.
What was likely the case is that you sometimes felt excited that you could be a great man and other times felt like an inferior man. You probably have very mild bipolar disorder - some days excited by a grandiose heroic destiny for your ego - the next day depressed that you don't have the intelligence and courage to socialize and be productive in a charming happy way.

The problem is when flawed temperaments cook up grandiose fantasies. Once they get addicted to their grandiose image of themselves, then it's impossible for them to be happy doing ordinary things like everybody else. They become jealous and envious of everything. Hence they have to demonize and hate 'worldliness'
User avatar
Cory Duchesne
Posts: 2320
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:35 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by Cory Duchesne »

Isaac wrote: What was likely the case is that you sometimes felt excited that you could be a great man and other times felt like an inferior man. You probably have very mild bipolar disorder - some days excited by a grandiose heroic destiny for your ego - the next day depressed that you don't have the intelligence and courage to socialize and be productive in a charming happy way.

The problem is when flawed temperaments cook up grandiose fantasies. Once they get addicted to their grandiose image of themselves, then it's impossible for them to be happy doing ordinary things like everybody else. They become jealous and envious of everything. Hence they have to demonize and hate 'worldliness'

You're revealing an awful lot about yourself, Isaac.

Is it difficult for you to imagine that not everybody has the same psychology as you?
User avatar
Alex Jacob
Posts: 1671
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:10 am
Location: Meta-Rabbit Hole

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by Alex Jacob »

"Ordinary, untalented people should learn to pride themselves in doing some valuable necessary labor, and in their free time, they should be content with playing sports, games, watching entertainment, art and science."

That new Swedish-girls mud-wrestling channel has solved many problems for me...
Ni ange, ni bête
Isaac
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:49 am

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by Isaac »

Hahahaha - playing sports, games, watching entertainment, appreciating art, science - and humor.
User avatar
Alex Jacob
Posts: 1671
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:10 am
Location: Meta-Rabbit Hole

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by Alex Jacob »

Isaac, are you pulling my leg?

It is possile to bring criticism against the QRS---indeed, they invite it.

But to reduce activity in life to playing sports, watching entertainment, appreciating art and science? You'd have to add soma to the daily menu.

"I drink to my annihilation".
Ni ange, ni bête
User avatar
Trevor Salyzyn
Posts: 2420
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 12:52 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by Trevor Salyzyn »

Ordinary and untalented people can appreciate a splash on canvas easier than a logical truth. This does not mean that philosophy is less of an artform than painting, only that painters work in a far more forgiving medium.
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by David Quinn »

Isaac wrote:
David Quinn wrote:
Isaac wrote:In other words - a mild depression.
Well, this implies a constancy of mood that wasn't really there. In reality, I was all over the place with my moods during those days - sometimes overwhelmed and in despair, sometimes light and mentally-powerful, sometimes boisterous and intoxicated with possibilities.
What was likely the case is that you sometimes felt excited that you could be a great man and other times felt like an inferior man. You probably have very mild bipolar disorder - some days excited by a grandiose heroic destiny for your ego - the next day depressed that you don't have the intelligence and courage to socialize and be productive in a charming happy way.

I should have added that it often feels like people are always staring at me and that sometimes I can hear a voice saying over and over, "Kill the mediocre. Kill the mediocre. Kill them all!" Do you think this is significant?

The problem is when flawed temperaments cook up grandiose fantasies. Once they get addicted to their grandiose image of themselves, then it's impossible for them to be happy doing ordinary things like everybody else. They become jealous and envious of everything. Hence they have to demonize and hate 'worldliness'
I'm not sure that it is possible to "demonize" worldliness, since worldliness, by its nature, is so very insipid and bland. It would be like trying to demonize Mother's Day or Kylie Minogue or Kermit the Frog.

As for hating worldliness and being disgusted by it in all its forms, this can be a very healthy attitude, provided that it doesn't consume you and make you lose sight of what is beautiful in life. Obviously, the ideal would be to transcend worldliness altogether and no longer have an emotional reaction to it either way. But short of that, disgust can be a very powerful force and a sign that one's heart, at least, is in the right place.

-
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by David Quinn »

Isaac wrote:
David Quinn wrote:
Isaac wrote:Why do you want to eliminate the ego, David?
I don't like falseness, self-deception, petty game-playing, madness, etc.
I think that those who claim to be egoless are either delusional or outright dishonest.

Or truthful about their condition.

I personally don't claim to be egoless, but I would have no problem with any fellow who is without ego saying that he is without ego. He would only be speaking the truth. Not that I have ever met such a fellow.

On the other hand, one often meets people who say they are without ego when they are clearly deluding themselves. Indeed, we have such a creature in residence here at the moment. That sort of self-deception is very unhealthy, yes.

I don't think it's achievable and I think that the effort, if it is honest, probably leads to madness and, if it is dishonest, is fraud.
You're merely speculating here. Or worse, engaging in wishful thinking.

...not to mention the irony of you using your likes and dislikes as a reason to try to lose that which is the source of them.
There may be irony in it, but it is still a perfectly valid approach. Indeed, there is no other way. It isn't possible for a person to become perfectly truthful unless he wants to become perfectly truthful.

-
Isaac
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:49 am

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by Isaac »

Alex Jacob wrote:Isaac, are you pulling my leg?

It is possible to bring criticism against the QRS---indeed, they invite it.

But to reduce activity in life to playing sports, watching entertainment, appreciating art and science?
What's wrong with that? What else did you have in mind?

I could have added other things - like dance and gardening. There's probably more.

What Alex - have you lost the ability to enjoy worldly things?

I've read your writings - and you remind me of a mystic. Tell me, have you had powerful mystical experiences?
User avatar
DHodges
Posts: 1531
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2002 8:20 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by DHodges »

Sue Hindmarsh wrote:DHodges wrote:
As for Kierkegaard, I never did care for him. It's like, Christianity wasn't Christian enough for him.
That’s interesting Dave – what drove you to “not care for him” is exactly what stirred my initial interest in him. There he was, living in a part of the world where EVERYONE was a Christian, and he vows to dedicate his life to encouraging people toward Christianity!?!
Well, I have to admit to a certain prejudice against anything calling itself Christianity, based on decades of living in a culture that is so steeped in it.

I have certainly known people who would (unironically) do just as you say - drive people to Christianity in a Christian culture. The call it 'witnessing' or some such.

While I know that Kierkegaard can be read in a different way, to me this has always seemed like looking for some uplifiting metaphoric meaning in Mein Kampf. For me, he does not pass the smell test. He has the stench of Christianity around him.

He is using "Christianity" in two different senses, and those two senses are almost opposites. One is very positive and one is very negative. I don't see this so much as him standing in opposition to the church as him having highly ambivalent feelings about it - both an attraction and a revulsion.

I suppose I agree with the idea that his writings are more an expression of his own issues (with his father) than anything else.

He did not want to abolish Christianity; he just wanted to fix it. He thought the problems were in "the Church" rather than in Christianity itself. I disagree.
User avatar
DHodges
Posts: 1531
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2002 8:20 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by DHodges »

Isaac wrote:What's your opinion of the emotions, dhodges?
I'm not sure exactly what you are asking.
User avatar
DHodges
Posts: 1531
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2002 8:20 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by DHodges »

Isaac wrote:Ordinary, untalented people should learn to pride themselves in doing some valuable necessary labor, and in their free time, they should be content with playing sports, games, watching entertainment, art and science.
That's pretty much what they do, isn't it?
Isaac
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:49 am

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by Isaac »

Dhodges,

Ordinary, untalented people should learn to pride themselves in doing some valuable necessary labor, and in their free time, they should be content with playing sports, games, watching entertainment, art and science.

That's pretty much what they do, isn't it?
Some do. Others (the undesirables) organize and join religions or cults, pick fights, steal, rape, wage war, verbally abuse others, or they wallow in depression because they aren't geniuses.
What's your opinion of the emotions, dhodges?
I'm not sure exactly what you are asking.
Do you think it's reasonable to want to eliminate feelings? I mean, I really enjoy films, video games, sports, science, literature. Do you think that the human race should outgrow all of that?
User avatar
maestro
Posts: 772
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 1:29 am

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by maestro »

Sorry for butting in, but I could not help but give my views on this one.
Isaac wrote: Do you think it's reasonable to want to eliminate feelings? I mean, I really enjoy films, video games, sports, fiction. Do you think that the human race should outgrow all of that?
The problem is that we are not educated about the feelings so that they are formed ad-hoc and without any intelligent guiding principle. In my opinion it is possible to feel intelligently, i.e. develop an emotional mind, which can choose feelings suited for the occasion, and which works in close coordination with the intellectual mind.

Otherwise our feelings and associations are at the mercy of accidental events (in childhood mostly), media and blind cultural values, which is a very sorry state indeed.
User avatar
Alex Jacob
Posts: 1671
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:10 am
Location: Meta-Rabbit Hole

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by Alex Jacob »

For a minute there I thought you were pulling everyone's leg.

Some religions lack traces of transcendentalism, a desire to escape, and elaborate plans to escape, and have more to do with living well and in harmony with surroundings. Japanese Shinto is like that:

"...The afterlife is not a primary concern in Shinto; much more emphasis is placed on fitting into this world, instead of preparing for the next."

"Shinto has no binding set of dogma, no holiest place for worshippers, no person or kami deemed holiest, and no defined set of prayers. Instead, Shinto is a collection of rituals and methods meant to mediate the relations of living humans and kami."

Many of the African religions that migrated to the New World with African slaves are notably similar, and the Gods that are recognized and worshipped are more presiding spirits of specific places in nature: rivers, hilltops, the ocean, the desert, the 'roads' or the 'paths, the forest, etc. Many if not all of the major religions---especially including Judaism with its strange, whirlwind God Yahweh who came out of the desert---began in these sorts of conceptualization, or relationships. A living relationship with a real spirit.

"The most immediately striking theme in the Shinto religion is a great love and reverence for Nature in all its forms and for natural artifacts and processes. Thus, a waterfall, the moon, or just an oddly shaped rock might come to be regarded as a kami (spirit); so might charismatic persons or more abstract entities like growth and fertility. As time went by, the original nature-worshipping roots of the religion, while never lost entirely, became attenuated and the kami took on more reified and anthropomorphic forms, with a formidable body of myth attached to them. The kami, however, are not transcendent deities in the usual Western and Indian sense of the word. Although divine, they are close to humanity; they inhabit the same world as we do, make the same mistakes as we do, and feel and think the same way as we do. Those who died will usually become kami, with their power and main characteristics given by their doings in life. Those believing other religions may be also venerated as kami after death, if there are Shinto believers who wish them to be."

The way I personally see things, is that it is the madness of culture that has lost its connection with nature that is the Moloch (see Howl)that so many of us have had to fight against, to go to battle with, to escape from. The early Beats used to say that they had no desire to transform modern, mechanized, robot culture, they just wanted to elude it. And to elude it meant to side-step it, and to live in some vital, healthy way.

The Vedic (Indian) religions (some but certainly not all of them), as I understand them, started from a very similar matrix: an awareness of the forces of nature and an almost lyrical-seeing of natural powers as divinities (kami). But they also were horrified at the processes of old age, disease and death. The way things all ended and the reality of physical tragedy was too much to bear. Out of this, it seems, came the transcendental imperative, but it takes many different forms.

You could actually apply a Japanese manoeuvre, Isaac: you could discover and see in all your activities, even in the video or the teevee that brings these entertainments, the operation of kami, and you could greet them and celebrate them as such. Your teevee monitor could be transformed into a shinto-esque shrine, replete with offerings, candles, colored paper, ritual greeting, opening and closing ceremonies, and even a ritual purification prior to periods of enjoyment. Same with the garden, with dance, with art and science. Science, peculiarly, is very shinto-able: years ago some old Japanese industrialists assembled to celebrate and honor the 60s transistor (the electronic part), to recognize it, to offer to it, to see it also as a 'kami' that had, in its way, become an ancestor! They performed the ritual solemnly, because they knew that it was this transitor that enabbled Japanese culture to get from where it was to where it is now. It was in no sense a joke, and it was not a metaphor.

For example (I ask out loud) why in the hell can not I have a shinto-relationship to the marvellous yonis of young women? I think I am the first one on this forum to seriously propose this.

Realistically and truthfully, I think girls are completely wonderful, provided they have have some of the original essence (kami) and have not been so grotesquely modified. And if they are trained to cooperate (sorry, Pye, I won't be able to honor you in my shinto-temple, rather I will banish you and all you represent!) so much the better! Hodges says he gets tired of it (sex) but I have never gotten to that point, myself. Why should I not elevate it, therefor, to sacred status? By doing so I will have more respect for it, and who knows? maybe the solar deity (who in Japan is female) will shine her blessing ever more down upon me?
Ni ange, ni bête
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

Isaac wrote:Others (the undesirables) organize and join religions or cults, pick fights, steal, rape, wage war, verbally abuse others, or they wallow in depression because they aren't geniuses.
Religions, cults, theft, verbal abuse or war mongering, taking anti-depressives.......

My god, that must be 99% of all people around me, including some billionaires and very influential politicians! All undesirables!
User avatar
DHodges
Posts: 1531
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2002 8:20 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

Feelings, nothing more than

Post by DHodges »

Isaac wrote:Do you think it's reasonable to want to eliminate feelings? I mean, I really enjoy films, video games, sports, science, literature. Do you think that the human race should outgrow all of that?
I don't have much of an opinion about what humans generally should do.

For myself, emotions do exist, but they are not allowed to rule my life. I follow reason to the extent that I am able. I try not to act unthinkingly.

I do particularly enjoy music, but as an activity, something I do, not as something that I passively consume. I do tend to read a lot, but it has shifted of late away from philosophy and science toward very practical skills - how to grow crops and animals, how to build basic structures like log cabins, and so on.

Alex Jacob wrote:The early Beats used to say that they had no desire to transform modern, mechanized, robot culture, they just wanted to elude it. And to elude it meant to side-step it, and to live in some vital, healthy way.
That's about where I'm at. I've been doing a lot of reading on the topic and generally preparing to drop out and go off-grid. It seems there are a fairly large number of people in the US doing this now - but you won't see much about it in the general mainstream media, almost by definition, since it's off-grid, and does not care to draw that much attention to itself.

The mainstream culture will go its own way. It is too late to stop it. All you can do is get out of the way, not get caught up in its slow self destruction.
Isaac
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:49 am

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by Isaac »

Sue
Sue Hindmarsh wrote:
He glorified suffering is what he did. I don't understand why he and others think it's necessary to try and beat out the zest and enjoyment of life.
Isn’t suffering also a part of life?

And - if you have spent your life thus far escaping suffering by coping with it in the ways I mentioned above, how do you conclude a life lived directly (that is, a life lived understanding suffering) is without “zest” and “enjoyment”?
I'm talking about Kierkegaard's philosophy. This is what he says:

It is terrifying when God takes out the instruments for the surgery for which no human being has the strength: to take away a person’s human zest for life, to slay him – in order that he can live as one who has died to the world and to the flesh. It cannot be otherwise, for in no other way can a human being love God. He must be in such a state of agony that if he were an unbeliever he would at no time hesitate to commit suicide. But in this state he must – live. Only in this state can he love God.

Why should I give away my zest for life?

Love God? Why the hell should I give a fuck about God?
Isaac
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:49 am

Re: Feelings, nothing more than

Post by Isaac »

DHodges wrote:
Isaac wrote:Do you think it's reasonable to want to eliminate feelings? I mean, I really enjoy films, video games, sports, science, literature. Do you think that the human race should outgrow all of that?
I don't have much of an opinion about what humans generally should do.

For myself, emotions do exist, but they are not allowed to rule my life. I follow reason to the extent that I am able. I try not to act unthinkingly.

I do particularly enjoy music, but as an activity, something I do, not as something that I passively consume. I do tend to read a lot, but it has shifted of late away from philosophy and science toward very practical skills - how to grow crops and animals, how to build basic structures like log cabins, and so on.
Good for you, Dave. It's nice to see someone here who values doing practical worldly things.
Isaac
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:49 am

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by Isaac »

Diebert,
Diebert van Rhijn wrote:
Isaac wrote:Others (the undesirables) organize and join religions or cults, pick fights, steal, rape, wage war, verbally abuse others, or they wallow in depression because they aren't geniuses.
Religions, cults, theft, verbal abuse or war mongering, taking anti-depressives.......

My god, that must be 99% of all people around me, including some billionaires and very influential politicians! All undesirables!
Yes, politicians and a lot of ordinary people would benefit from better education and genetic engineering. Ultimately, to me, the meaning of life is pleasure, excitement and entertainment. Humanity needs to learn how to enjoy itself and we have a lot of work to do when it comes to tweaking ourselves to be happy.

There's nothing wrong with taking anti-depressives if you have depression. Kierkegaard of course would say that his depression is simply God doing surgery! Retarded.
Isaac
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:49 am

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by Isaac »

David,
David Quinn wrote:
Isaac wrote:The problem is when flawed temperaments cook up grandiose fantasies. Once they get addicted to their grandiose image of themselves, then it's impossible for them to be happy doing ordinary things like everybody else. They become jealous and envious of everything. Hence they have to demonize and hate 'worldliness'
I'm not sure that it is possible to "demonize" worldliness, since worldliness, by its nature, is so very insipid and bland.
Oh and going beyond consciousness by submitting to truths about the totality is not insipid and bland? Your philosophy is very dull, it requires no intelligence to shut down your mind.
As for hating worldliness and being disgusted by it in all its forms, this can be a very healthy attitude, provided that it doesn't consume you and make you lose sight of what is beautiful in life.
What in your opinion is beautiful?

Obviously, the ideal would be to transcend worldliness altogether and no longer have an emotional reaction to it either way.
Why is that obviously the thing to do? It's not obvious at all.
User avatar
Alex Jacob
Posts: 1671
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:10 am
Location: Meta-Rabbit Hole

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by Alex Jacob »

[Kierkegaard quote] "It is terrifying when God takes out the instruments for the surgery for which no human being has the strength: to take away a person’s human zest for life, to slay him – in order that he can live as one who has died to the world and to the flesh. It cannot be otherwise, for in no other way can a human being love God. He must be in such a state of agony that if he were an unbeliever he would at no time hesitate to commit suicide. But in this state he must – live. Only in this state can he love God."

"Why should I give away my zest for life?

"Love God? Why the hell should I give a fuck about God?"

Kierkegaard only seemed to have access to a strict Protestant interpretation of Christianity, but the fact is there are many different sorts of [conceptions of] God, many possible relationships to God, existence, Life, the Cosmos.

Kierkegaard seems to define a pretty strung-out, a dramatic, an obsessed relationship to the figure of Christ and in that represents a strain of Northern European protestantism, a branch of puritanism, Calvinism, etc.

There people weren't having a great deal of fun...and they had huge existential issues with life, love, enjoyment and so many things. But that is certainly not the only possible relationship to God, to Jesus of Nazareth, to Christianity, to religious and ethical life. To understand Kierkegaard you have to understand a whole context.

Very soon after Kierkegaard, many different people in many different fields began a pretty substantial reassessment of the whole Jesusonian trip. In Europe there arose more naturalistic movements that pushed this uptight Christianity to the periphery and defined an ethic with real 'zest for life'---I'm thinking of Knut Hamsun a Norwegian writer (Hunger, Pan, Victoria, Mysteries) who basically tossed this afflicted Christianity out the window. But he did not necessarily depart from a relationship to Christianity.

There are as many ways to define a relationship to the Sacrifice of Jesus as there are people doing the defining.

The question of 'love' in relation to oneself, others, Life or a divinity is a rather complex one.
Ni ange, ni bête
User avatar
DHodges
Posts: 1531
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2002 8:20 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by DHodges »

Alex Jacob wrote:Kierkegaard seems to define a pretty strung-out, a dramatic, an obsessed relationship to the figure of Christ and in that represents a strain of Northern European protestantism, a branch of puritanism, Calvinism, etc.
I can't help but think that his conception of God reflects his relationship with his father.
User avatar
Alex Jacob
Posts: 1671
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:10 am
Location: Meta-Rabbit Hole

Re: Kierkegaard was Wrong & likely Mentally ill

Post by Alex Jacob »

Yes, and the paterfamilias is in many ways an extension of the paternalism of Christian institutions, and the paternal figures---the grumpy, severe, old men---have children whom the lord-it-over with all the same will, severity that was meted-out to them. Also interesting is the original conquering Roman Church that functions through the conquered and surrendered pater.
Ni ange, ni bête
Locked