GlenWillson Posted November 11, 2017 Posted November 11, 2017 Hello fellow classical liberals, I recently wrote a piece exploring the ultimate truth and the meaning of life, with a focus on science, religion, and language. If you are interested in these topics please visit www.glenwillson.com Thank you!
barn Posted November 11, 2017 Posted November 11, 2017 Hi GlenWillson, Why do you think anyone should read it? What is it's unique feature that makes it stand out from any other 'truths'? Kind regards, Barnsley
RichardY Posted November 11, 2017 Posted November 11, 2017 @GlenWillson Hi, welcome to the forum. Bit of a tease the essay, where is the depth, personally would like to have seen much fewer references, and more importantly whole passages or paragraphs from the authors quoted, instead of generalist introductions. I wouldn't really call it an essay either more of an overview, of some influential people in the field of psychology and literature. Wikipedia - "An essay is, generally, a piece of writing that gives the author's own argument — but the definition is vague, overlapping with those of an article, a pamphlet, and a short story. Essays have traditionally been sub-classified as formal and informal." It is actually a topic I have been thinking about recently. Had a person message me on the forum about "The wise does not speak, he who speaks is not wise. Tao Te Ching" I think in the search for truth there are two methods 1) The Western Socratic Dialogue in the pursuit of truth in Virtue. 2) The "Eastern Socratic Dialogue" in the pursuit of truth of (mind and body) to nature. At the end of the day you still need balls(in one form or another) to back up Virtue. Speculation: Psychedelics are something I've been thinking about as well. Imho they fragment conscientiousness making high or moderately conscientious people less so, perhaps also shifting them politically more to the left. Even though they may increase IQ and openness to experience imho (breaking a bone to have it grow back stronger, perhaps). Although what would they do to someone already low in conscientiousness? Having looked at MBTI personality types (I'm INTP) on the Internet one thing I have seen mentioned is that people who suffer with schizophrenia should not take psychedelics, Why? imho because they are already very low in conscientiousness so doing so is going to fragment their reality even more. A question that has recently entered my mind is if a person could "somehow" influence their psychology to go from a less stable learning matrix( low conscientiousness) to a more stable productive matrix (High conscientiousness). Freewill(even though I think it is a fabrication, I don't agree with determinism either another fabrication) perhaps maybe one way of going about it, dawn of the Nietzschean overman or something.
Donnadogsoth Posted November 11, 2017 Posted November 11, 2017 "The wise does not speak, he who speaks is not wise. Tao Te Ching" Was whoever spoke those words wise or not wise?
RichardY Posted November 16, 2017 Posted November 16, 2017 On 11/11/2017 at 11:11 PM, Donnadogsoth said: Was whoever spoke those words wise or not wise? Good question perhaps the guy thought he was being virtuous or maintaining integrity in someway instead. If he is not wise then why should anyone listen, but then if you are wise, why keep on talking for the sake of it. Makes me think of the term "Wise Guys" from mafia movies. If you have all the truth, then why would you speak in the first place? I think talk might be a better logical translation, not really decided. I mean you'd be a bit of a jerk if you didn't warn of landmines, I guess or occasionally tell people to "mind the gap" or something. Tao Te Ching Verse 56 The wise does not speak. He who speaks is not wise. Keep silent and close one’s mouth. Keep guard on one’s sensory organs. Round off one’s edges. Untie the entangled. Harmonize with the glory. (Perhaps do not go against the grain Mix with the lowliness. This is called the Mystic Unity. Because the wise is unified with all and has no distinction, Thus, one cannot get close to him, Nor can one keep far away from him, One cannot benefit him, Nor can one harm him, One cannot honor him, Nor can one disgrace him. Therefore, he is honored by the whole world
GlenWillson Posted November 18, 2017 Author Posted November 18, 2017 Thanks for the feedback! On 11/11/2017 at 1:45 PM, RichardY said: @GlenWillson Hi, welcome to the forum. Bit of a tease the essay, where is the depth, personally would like to have seen much fewer references, and more importantly whole passages or paragraphs from the authors quoted, instead of generalist introductions. I wouldn't really call it an essay either more of an overview, of some influential people in the field of psychology and literature. Wikipedia - "An essay is, generally, a piece of writing that gives the author's own argument — but the definition is vague, overlapping with those of an article, a pamphlet, and a short story. Essays have traditionally been sub-classified as formal and informal." It is actually a topic I have been thinking about recently. Had a person message me on the forum about "The wise does not speak, he who speaks is not wise. Tao Te Ching" I think in the search for truth there are two methods 1) The Western Socratic Dialogue in the pursuit of truth in Virtue. 2) The "Eastern Socratic Dialogue" in the pursuit of truth of (mind and body) to nature. At the end of the day you still need balls(in one form or another) to back up Virtue. Speculation: Psychedelics are something I've been thinking about as well. Imho they fragment conscientiousness making high or moderately conscientious people less so, perhaps also shifting them politically more to the left. Even though they may increase IQ and openness to experience imho (breaking a bone to have it grow back stronger, perhaps). Although what would they do to someone already low in conscientiousness? Having looked at MBTI personality types (I'm INTP) on the Internet one thing I have seen mentioned is that people who suffer with schizophrenia should not take psychedelics, Why? imho because they are already very low in conscientiousness so doing so is going to fragment their reality even more. A question that has recently entered my mind is if a person could "somehow" influence their psychology to go from a less stable learning matrix( low conscientiousness) to a more stable productive matrix (High conscientiousness). Freewill(even though I think it is a fabrication, I don't agree with determinism either another fabrication) perhaps maybe one way of going about it, dawn of the Nietzschean overman or something. Thanks for the feedback!
Recommended Posts