Big Stories: The New Universe - Integral Post-Metaphysical Spirituality2024-03-29T00:28:31Zhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/big-stories-the-new-universe?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A14706&feed=yes&xn_auth=noThis line of thinking can be…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2011-05-19:5301756:Comment:165412011-05-19T18:29:07.285Zkelamunihttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/kelamuni
<p>This line of thinking can be brought into resonance with a particular take on Buddhism, which is where I am coming from here.</p>
<p>"It remains nothing but a big story." hahaha. That is also where I am coming from. And the Bible is nothing but a big story too. Stories are good. We can learn alot from stories. There are deep allegorical truths in the stories told from the venerable texts of the great religions. But they're <em>stories</em>.</p>
<p><br></br><cite>e…</cite></p>
<p>This line of thinking can be brought into resonance with a particular take on Buddhism, which is where I am coming from here.</p>
<p>"It remains nothing but a big story." hahaha. That is also where I am coming from. And the Bible is nothing but a big story too. Stories are good. We can learn alot from stories. There are deep allegorical truths in the stories told from the venerable texts of the great religions. But they're <em>stories</em>.</p>
<p><br/><cite>e said:</cite></p>
<blockquote><div><p>It almost pains me but I agree with Kela. hahaha However, if you see that all stories end at the outer limits of the atmosphere, what is the problem? That is, no matter how grandiose the projected story...it remains nothing but a big story i.e. it’s no big deal. So I guess I also agree with everyone else as well. :-)</p>
</div>
</blockquote> It almost pains me but I agre…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2011-05-15:5301756:Comment:157712011-05-15T16:04:04.983Zehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/e
<p>It almost pains me but I agree with Kela. hahaha However, if you see that all stories end at the outer limits of the atmosphere, what is the problem? That is, no matter how grandiose the projected story...it remains nothing but a big story i.e. it’s no big deal. So I guess I also agree with everyone else as well. :-)</p>
<p>It almost pains me but I agree with Kela. hahaha However, if you see that all stories end at the outer limits of the atmosphere, what is the problem? That is, no matter how grandiose the projected story...it remains nothing but a big story i.e. it’s no big deal. So I guess I also agree with everyone else as well. :-)</p> Hi theurg,
I have noticed in…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2011-05-11:5301756:Comment:159062011-05-11T19:16:27.860Zkelamunihttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/kelamuni
<p><br></br>Hi theurg,</p>
<p>I have noticed in some of the writings I've been reading online that the term "ungrund," which derives from Eckhart, Boehme and Schelling, and which Caputo makes schrift of (see "the rose is without why"), has been connected to some of the material mentioned here, particularly with Meillassoux rejection of Leibniz's sufficient reason. I have in the back of my mind been relating the too as well but we will have to wait until I have thought it…</p>
<p><br/>Hi theurg,</p>
<p>I have noticed in some of the writings I've been reading online that the term "ungrund," which derives from Eckhart, Boehme and Schelling, and which Caputo makes schrift of (see "the rose is without why"), has been connected to some of the material mentioned here, particularly with Meillassoux rejection of Leibniz's sufficient reason. I have in the back of my mind been relating the too as well but we will have to wait until I have thought it through.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><br/><cite>theurj said:</cite></p>
<blockquote><div>You might recall we discussed some of this in the <a target="_self" href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/after-finitude">After Finitude</a> thread. On the 2nd page of the thread there is a link to the free e-copy of <em>Nihil Unbound</em> at Scribd.</div>
</blockquote> Hi Balder,
I guess it all dep…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2011-05-11:5301756:Comment:156392011-05-11T19:11:45.268Zkelamunihttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/kelamuni
<p>Hi Balder,</p>
<p>I guess it all depends on what we mean by "postmetaphysics." If we mean the Integral Post-Metaphysical Spirituality of Wilber and others, and the attendant idea of the "myth of the given," Brassier and Meillassoux may have to be contended with. But in another sense, the thinking of both Brassier and Meillassoux might also be understood as being post-metaphysical depending on what we mean by "metaphysics." And that is how I have taken them and why I have posted material on…</p>
<p>Hi Balder,</p>
<p>I guess it all depends on what we mean by "postmetaphysics." If we mean the Integral Post-Metaphysical Spirituality of Wilber and others, and the attendant idea of the "myth of the given," Brassier and Meillassoux may have to be contended with. But in another sense, the thinking of both Brassier and Meillassoux might also be understood as being post-metaphysical depending on what we mean by "metaphysics." And that is how I have taken them and why I have posted material on them here lately.<br/><br/><cite>Balder said:</cite></p>
<blockquote><div>I remember when The Nameless One mentioned Brassier's book about a year ago. At the time, he wondered if it might spell the end of the postmetaphysical project. For that reason alone, I know I need to check it out.</div>
</blockquote> You might recall we discussed…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2011-05-11:5301756:Comment:156352011-05-11T15:05:04.945ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
You might recall we discussed some of this in the <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/after-finitude" target="_self">After Finitude</a> thread. On the 2nd page of the thread there is a link to the free e-copy of <em>Nihil Unbound</em> at Scribd.
You might recall we discussed some of this in the <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/after-finitude" target="_self">After Finitude</a> thread. On the 2nd page of the thread there is a link to the free e-copy of <em>Nihil Unbound</em> at Scribd. I remember when The Nameless…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2011-05-11:5301756:Comment:156342011-05-11T13:48:31.993ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
I remember when The Nameless One mentioned Brassier's book about a year ago. At the time, he wondered if it might spell the end of the postmetaphysical project. For that reason alone, I know I need to check it out.
I remember when The Nameless One mentioned Brassier's book about a year ago. At the time, he wondered if it might spell the end of the postmetaphysical project. For that reason alone, I know I need to check it out. jeez, it sounds like i'm chan…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2011-05-11:5301756:Comment:152542011-05-11T09:50:49.789Zkelamunihttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/kelamuni
<p>jeez, it sounds like i'm channelling ray brassier in the tract below. haha. i had a somewhat different tack in mind, though.</p>
<p><br></br><cite>kelamuni said:</cite></p>
<blockquote><div><p>this stuff strikes me as arrogant and vapid and as in the same vein as the way of thinking that it would seek to save us from. it is the personalistic universe, a view that sees the universe as populated by personifications and as only having meaning by virtue of those persons. well that is not too far…</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>jeez, it sounds like i'm channelling ray brassier in the tract below. haha. i had a somewhat different tack in mind, though.</p>
<p><br/><cite>kelamuni said:</cite></p>
<blockquote><div><p>this stuff strikes me as arrogant and vapid and as in the same vein as the way of thinking that it would seek to save us from. it is the personalistic universe, a view that sees the universe as populated by personifications and as only having meaning by virtue of those persons. well that is not too far from seeing the sun as a living being, tornadoes as having wills, stars as creatures. etc.</p>
<p>onanistic fairy tales. juvenile fantasy. self indulgent, narsissitic 1st person nonsense. the buddha and all the great greek sages taught us to move away from this.</p>
<p>what the hell. did matthew fox just jerk off in front of us? is this where theology has come to?</p>
<p>this is the very same view that not too long ago put man at the center of the universe. and look where that got us. you've come a long way pontiac.</p>
</div>
</blockquote> also concerning the manifest…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2011-05-11:5301756:Comment:159012011-05-11T09:36:54.178Zkelamunihttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/kelamuni
<p>also concerning the manifest image, brassier writes,</p>
<p>"Thus, although they are the totems of two otherwise divergent philosophical traditions, the two "canonical" twentieth-century philosophers, Heidegger and Wittgenstein, share the conviction that the manifest image enjoys a philosophical privilege vis-a-vis the scientific image, and that the sorts of entities and processes postulated by the scientific theory are in some way founded upon, or derivative of, our more "originary"…</p>
<p>also concerning the manifest image, brassier writes,</p>
<p>"Thus, although they are the totems of two otherwise divergent philosophical traditions, the two "canonical" twentieth-century philosophers, Heidegger and Wittgenstein, share the conviction that the manifest image enjoys a philosophical privilege vis-a-vis the scientific image, and that the sorts of entities and processes postulated by the scientific theory are in some way founded upon, or derivative of, our more "originary" pre-scientific understanding, whether this be construed in terms of our "being-in-the-world," or our practical engagement in "language-games."</p>
<p> </p>
<p>this may be true, and probably is, considering wittgenstein's distaste for the worship of science and idolization for people like einstein, and heidegger's antagonism toward "instrumental reason." but that is not how i personally have read them or made use of their critiques. i have always read them or at least used them as saying that the epistemological project of <em>philosophy</em>, not "science" per se, the project initiated by descartes and carried on by locke, berkley, hume, kant, russell, husserl, etc. has its basis in our "historicity" (Heidegger) and/or "forms of life" (Wittgenstein). this does not put me at odds with brassier's interpretation, though.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>something else struck me while reading brassier as well: that some professional philosophers may defend the manifest image since they may sense that when science eventually realizes that it is no longer in need of empiricists and positivists to provide theoretical "foundations" for their enterprise, philosophy will be out of business. i don't think wittgenstein would have minded that development though. ironically, and true to his bauhaus informed aesthetics of intellectual sparsity, he saw philosophy, apart from his own "therapeutic" brand, of course, as primarily a useless fifth wheel anyway. he was a kind of early proponent for the "voluntary extinction" of philosophy.</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p> well, actually, sellars' essa…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2011-05-11:5301756:Comment:156332011-05-11T09:07:04.501Zkelamunihttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/kelamuni
well, actually, sellars' essay figures prominently in brassier's book <em>nihil unbound</em>. check this out:<a href="http://theeveningrednessinthewest.wordpress.com/2009/04/16/%E2%80%9Cthe-myth-of-jones%E2%80%9D-wilfrid-sellars%E2%80%99-philosophical-fable/">http://theeveningrednessinthewest.wordpress.com/2009/04/16/%E2%80%9Cthe-myth-of-jones%E2%80%9D-wilfrid-sellars%E2%80%99-philosophical-fable/</a> I'm just gonna HAFTA buy this book.<br></br><br></br><cite>kelamuni…</cite>
well, actually, sellars' essay figures prominently in brassier's book <em>nihil unbound</em>. check this out:<a href="http://theeveningrednessinthewest.wordpress.com/2009/04/16/%E2%80%9Cthe-myth-of-jones%E2%80%9D-wilfrid-sellars%E2%80%99-philosophical-fable/">http://theeveningrednessinthewest.wordpress.com/2009/04/16/%E2%80%9Cthe-myth-of-jones%E2%80%9D-wilfrid-sellars%E2%80%99-philosophical-fable/</a> I'm just gonna HAFTA buy this book.<br/><br/><cite>kelamuni said:</cite>
<blockquote><div><p>Today I received the following interview with Ray Brassier from He-who-used-to-post-here-but-shall-remain-Nameless-out-of-respect-for-his-anonymity. <a rel="nofollow" href="http://kronos.org.pl/index.php?23151,896">http://kronos.org.pl/index.php?23151,896</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>It shares alot in common with the important essay by Wilfred Sellars that I posted above, "Philosophy and the Scientific Image of Man." Brassier uses the term 'manifest image' in the interview, showing its intersection with the Sellars essay ; it is also an indication of how important and influential Sellars metaphilosophical essay was and continues to be.</p>
<p>Brassier is an admirer the socalled 'speculative realists,' referred to in the Lovecraft essays linked above, but has some rather harse (and funny) things to say about those who call the 'group' a movement.</p>
<p>Brassier's interview could also be read in tandem with the book by Charles Taylor, <em>A Secular Age</em>, referred to in the thread started by xibalba. Brassier clearly subscribes to the "subtraction" view referred to and criticized by Taylor, when he talks about the chipping away at religion and mythology by science. But I don't think either Brassier or Sellars are as naive as the somewhat caricaturized version of the theory that Taylor presents: both acknowledge that science develops out of the common sense view, and Brassier notes the science and metaphysics are in some sense indissociable. Bur regardless of the ingenuity and erudition adduced by Taylor, I personally am not entirely convinced that there isn't at least an element of truth to the subtraction theory. I will reserve definitive judgement until I have given Taylor a more thorough read, though.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And so our present thread widens further to intersect with not only the horror thread but the thread on Taylor's contribution to the discussion on the possibility of a postmetaphysical spirituality. This thread truly is 'Big.' haha</p>
<p>Isn't it weird and wonderful how all these threads are interelated? It's as if there were some god or daemon directing the movement so that all become connected in the Big Oneness that governs all things. BAhahahaa.</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
</div>
</blockquote> There is one last strand that…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2011-05-09:5301756:Comment:152462011-05-09T20:45:01.448Zkelamunihttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/kelamuni
<p>There is one last strand that I wish to bring to light before I retire to reflect on the material and that concerns the "philosophy of the subject" and its critique. As is well known, the 20th century has seen an entire range of assaults upon the conception of the subject -- from Heidegger and Wittgenstein's parallel deconstructions, to structuralism, the critical theory of the Frankfurt school, and finally to the post-structuralists particularly Derrida, Foucault and Baudrillard. (Note, for…</p>
<p>There is one last strand that I wish to bring to light before I retire to reflect on the material and that concerns the "philosophy of the subject" and its critique. As is well known, the 20th century has seen an entire range of assaults upon the conception of the subject -- from Heidegger and Wittgenstein's parallel deconstructions, to structuralism, the critical theory of the Frankfurt school, and finally to the post-structuralists particularly Derrida, Foucault and Baudrillard. (Note, for example, how the theme of the critique of the subject informs and shapes the following article :<a href="http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/postmodernism/">http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/postmodernism/</a> )</p>
<p>The "philosophy of the subject" is also one of the central themes of Habermas' conception of a "post-metaphysics," our namesake here.</p>
<p>There are many approaches to the critique of the subject, but the most profound, and interesting imo, is that of Levinas. Levinas imagines an all consuming "I" that absorbs everything into itself and imagines everything in terms of itself. Levinas critique had a powerful influence on Sartre's later conceptions of the self, which amount almost to a mea culpa if I read him right. Sartre also sees this same all consuming "I" in the work of Hegel and Heidegger in the form of their idea that we understand ourselves by contrasting ourselves with others, particularly cultural "others" (Cf. here Herodotus conception of history as the description of other "races.") In this regard the conception of the "I" becomes central to Europe's own conception of itself, to its history of colonialism, to its judging of the rest of the world in terms of itself, and its sense that the rest of the world should confrom to its normative standards.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>In any case, here is an essay describing Levinas' account of the "I": <a href="http://www.theologicalclowning.org/pete3.html">http://www.theologicalclowning.org/pete3.html</a></p>
<p> </p>