Это видео недоступно.
Сожалеем об этом.
The Whole Shebang: Imagination between Mind and Nature
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 май 2020
- Part two of a dialogue with Becca Tarnas. This time, we talked about the role of imagination in the philosophy of nature and history of science, the dangers of technological capture of imagination, and more.
![Baby Kia - WYG (feat. LAZER DIM 700) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/avlLsOH_oJc/mqdefault.jpg)
Brilliant two video discussion. Deep, broad, current, and imaginal! Well done!
Thought you were two colleagues hanging out, talking, and (very obviously) falling in love with one another- but turns out you guys are actually married. Go figure.
I've heard it described this way: We all become something akin to a vampire when we watch films -- precisely because we're consuming images made for us. When we lose our capability to create our own images, then we have no choice but to feast on those made by others. In the dark, no less.
I agree that technolological and plastic entertainment has weakend much of the imagination. When kids are made to go outside and play, especially alone, they're basically forced to use it, which strengthens it like a muscle. However, I want to push back on the VR comments because I see it as just another form of art. If you go to a museum and admire artwork, read a good book or watch a good film, you are participating in somebody else's imagination; VR is just a more technologically advanced way of participating in somebody else's art, and this type of experience isn't necessarily unhealthy; it, like any other activity, just needs to be done in moderation and balanced with other forms of play.
Edit: oh, and the great talk by way.
In the sense of VR as another art form, I do actually agree with you. It's just when it is spoken of as a replacement for "reality" that I get nervous, or think of individuals who spend much of their lives playing video games becoming even more ensnared in a digital world. All that being said, I have a feeling that the shift to being more online that has come with the pandemic is actually reminding us how important face to face interactions and the celebration of the natural world really are. But yes, VR as artistic creation can certainly go far.
@@Becca.Tarnas it's totally reasonable to be concerned because most of us ARE in a logarithmic trend toward some type of transhumanist matrix of consumer dopamine fixes. I don't know if you guys have watched that TV show Black Mirror, but I would say some of the content is actually prophetic.
I think it's okay, sometimes even healthy, to dabble in fantasy like VR, but it might be healthy to have a trip sitter like you to remind us that it's just a trip... so we don't become totally lost in it.
@@Becca.Tarnas an idea to consider is whether or not there is such a thing as unnatural. we are all part of nature, and we are all to some degree artists; scientists will continue discovering without considering the ramifications of their discoveries... it's just what they do because it's in their nature. engineers will keep drawing, and sculptors will continue making. salesman will continue selling practical or impractical art in order to survive.
progress is not stoppable, so it's best we get our ideas out there, find a healthy balance in how we communally and individually dance with creation.
for me, finding the right balance between resistance and Tao.. . immersion and meta is just part of the music. sometimes it's good just to roll with the current Rock, sometimes there's just too many musicians out of tune around you so you got to either withdraw, conduct, or try to look past the cacophony to recognize some beauty in the song.
Long live cognitive liberty.
Beautiful conversations! Keep the absurd flame of philosophy alive 😉
Imagination is one of our greatest ways to understand our divine spark
You guys should make some commentary of any of the Manly P. Hall lectures
thank you, this was beautiful and insightful and is bringing me down new great paths of thought... really happy i stumbled across both of you!
Get a room already.
Re:Astrology. The relative positions of the planets against a backdrop of stars functions as the hands of a clock marking out time. All life on Earth depends on sunlight energy to exist, how much sunlight any organism receives at any one time depends on the seasons, the time of day, how much sunlight is direct and how much is reflected by the moon. It would seem an obvious somewhat trivial deduction that the temperament of at least an intelligent living organism if not all living organisms, be subject at the time of its birth to whether this singular life giving source of energy is on the rise, or on the decline, reaching a maximum, reaching a minimum, or at an equilibrium.
Humans may each be individual and unique but there is much we share in common through the passage of life, why not our celestial clock tick off the milestones from cradle to grave yet predict different paths for different temperaments?
That the wardrobe in the corner of a room exerts more gravitational influence than Mars is neither here nor there.
I think there's an alternative to that perhaps human perception bias, cause and effect, and time. In short, it involves the moment, and in the moment everything exists in the universe, and this is "flashed" in the same way a program can be flashed onto a chip.
The human brain is a calculus machine that takes these moments (slices) and derives the shape of what we see. This is duplicated by birds, for instance, but not internally in their brain so much but as an outward awareness given by sound mostly, or smell in the case of dogs, a group intelligence.
The moment is real but the series of moments that give us an impression of time, allow slippage and different "flavors" to emerge, as expressions of energy movement, each expression being real in the moment but perhaps suspect as a series of moments strung together, because what we perceive as time, is only the pushing out of one thought by another, or the vacuum left by the exiting of one thought draws in the next.
In the moment, the reality of this universe comes closest to the reality of potential, the non-being.
Me in the woods
I had a birth chart/career horoscope reading this week. I got it from a very good astrologer and I trust/resonate with the reading and his advice, but it's still very disappointing. I'm sharing b/c... fuck the universe. I would prefer the void.
This video needs some music ruclips.net/video/8MRfvI8Mwv4/видео.html
Everything we think is a projection, we just need to become conscious of it-make our psychic contents conscious and take ownership. That’s going to be our next evolution. But it’s going to require the values of personal honesty and courage-values that aren’t collectivist. Without those values there is no life, just more pumping out of dull-eyed children, i.e., followers-as prescribed.
I find the concept of astrology just as irritating as the mechanization of nature. Both seem to remove individual agency. Here's where I'm coming from: What is known as God, I see as Potential, not part of the universe since the universe is Movement, but necessary on both "sides" since we give potential meaning. Since language is part of this universe, we can't use it to describe potential except as a sideways kind of seeing, and movement is the seeing. Meaning is the imagination, or at least the result of it.
Part two of this is the individual. I see myself as a conduit, with selfless giving at one end, and imagination as the reward coming in at the other end. Without this understanding, any sort of movement (including thinking) is valid. Since we are embedded in Nature, the role for humans is that of steward and this is the giving. The way this works is to see other types of intelligence, like that of birds, where the communal experience is that of sound, or smell for other creatures.
Where tech comes in is the approach of this stewardship in creating or diminishing of intelligence around us, thru environment. Noisy machines diminish intelligence and so does overpowering stink, and this is a factor in diminishing our human intelligence. It becomes cleverness, which is a grasping for power that is lost, a narrowing of the conduit between potential and movement, restricting imagination which is a higher order of movement.
I think if you choose the perspective that astrology removes personal agency, it would be pretty irritating. That's not really the case though. A lot of people choose to see astrology as fatalistic and deterministic, but it's only that way if you choose to use it that way.
I like to think of a natal chart as a your own personal instruction booklet. It tells you about your features, the highlights, potential trouble areas. It's just information about how you tend to operate in different areas of your life, and you're 100% free to choose how you use that information! Just like any kind of tool, it can be applied however the user sees fit.
Humans are blessed with the most incredible technology on the planet: our brains. We have the ability to choose our thoughts, feelings, and actions, always. Astrology doesn't remove any of that, but it could give you some really helpful clues about what you might be inclined to do with that personal agency.
@@LemonadaStand I don't see astrology as being fatalistic or deterministic, only as a fixation. It tends to fix an idea in place and this idea is the identity of the individual.
The opposite of fixing something in place, I call allowance. These are two completely different frames of reference. Which would you say is better?
Of course, a balance is necessary, but there's only room for one perception at a time in the human brain. Is this perception one of a fixed belief, leading inexorably to a fixed identity, or that of an allowance for other expressions, this allowance coming from a different, less selfish, more outwardly focused identity?
So rather than the me, or I, promoted by such things as astrology, media, business etc (and which tend to become transcribed to a cultural or even universal identity, similarly fixed and singular, and inwardly focused for gain), instead of this death gaze of static fixation, a responsible caring outward identity (steward perhaps) should be promoted, simply because this acts as a springboard for further movement. It allows, and in doing so gives agency to the individual by opening up the commons.
@@projectmalus That's interesting. I suppose I disagree that astrology is inherently a fixation. I think, ironically, that comes down to how a person chooses to use it, i.e. personal agency.
I'm usually wary of any idea that "should" be promoted, because I thinking telling people what they should and shouldn't do has the potential to fix them on a path that feels untrue to them. My general recommendation is that people know their own personal values, learn how to accept them without judgment, and move through life looking through that lens. To say a certain set of behaviors should be promoted inserts our own bias and personal desires, which doesn't feel selfless to me. Granted, I agree that it would be nice if our world felt more progressive in certain areas, but that's also just my opinion, not the right or wrong way.
Astrology actually seems quite fluid to me. The ideas and qualities themselves are neutral, and people are free to apply them as they see fit. I see it less as a determination of identity and more as an insight to tendencies and natural wiring. You present the choices of a selfish or an outwardly focused identity, but I think humans are much more complex than that. It sounds like you're talking more about actions (since you're mentioning motion and things like caring, being responsible), and I don't think our action determine our identity.