THANKS FOR WATCHING! If you enjoyed the content, please like and share this video, subscribe to the channel, and turn on notifications for future updates. :)
This is so simple!!! If one assumes consciousness is a force, a movement, similar to a wind, then the amount of consciousness captured by an entity (from atom to human), depends on the entity's ability to capture! For example, a paper bag can catch the wind. The bigger the paper bag, the more of the wind that can be captured, revealed, and use!
Professor Vaidya leaves us with an important message here. Consciousness is the talk of the town in the world of philosophy. So it is natural that while seeking convergence or dialogue with Indian philosophy, consciousness will be used as the subject matter. But Indian philosophical schools are darshanas - a viewpoint of life. So merely cherry picking consciousness just because it is hot topic of the day wont be that much fruitful. Indian philosophical schools are paradigmatically interested in ultimate aim of life and within that context the nature of self becomes important (one self, many self, no self, etc). Indian philosophy contrasts the human condition and the lived-world with the ultimate nature of self and reality. Consciousness within this context is not in contention with matter and thus hard problem is never a big problem in Indian philosophy. In contrast, in western philosophy, from the early modern times mind has been contrasted with matter and hence the relation between becomes so very important in that context... Shocked to know that Professor Vaidya is no more with us. His works will continue to enrich those working to bring together Indian and Western philosophy in closer contact to each other.
There is actually a great intellectual chasm between the ancient philosophers and the latter-day.scholars who developed their theories on the basis of the earlier works. The passages of the Upanishads are extremely cryptic and poetical in nature and this resulted in some great misinterpretations. Lines such as "everything is Brahman" were taken literally missing the real intention behind such utterances. The word of the primary texts thus proved to be a great and impenetrable barrier. In the opinion of this writer, the foremost teachers and exponents of the philosophical schools -- at least some of them -- were perhaps aware of the true meaning, but even their own writings seem to have been misinterpreted! There is therefore a great intellectual chasm - a chasm of language, of purport and of meaning.
THANKS FOR WATCHING!
If you enjoyed the content, please like and share this video, subscribe to the channel, and turn on notifications for future updates. :)
This is so simple!!! If one assumes consciousness is a force, a movement, similar to a wind, then the amount of consciousness captured by an entity (from atom to human), depends on the entity's ability to capture! For example, a paper bag can catch the wind. The bigger the paper bag, the more of the wind that can be captured, revealed, and use!
Professor Vaidya leaves us with an important message here. Consciousness is the talk of the town in the world of philosophy. So it is natural that while seeking convergence or dialogue with Indian philosophy, consciousness will be used as the subject matter. But Indian philosophical schools are darshanas - a viewpoint of life. So merely cherry picking consciousness just because it is hot topic of the day wont be that much fruitful. Indian philosophical schools are paradigmatically interested in ultimate aim of life and within that context the nature of self becomes important (one self, many self, no self, etc). Indian philosophy contrasts the human condition and the lived-world with the ultimate nature of self and reality. Consciousness within this context is not in contention with matter and thus hard problem is never a big problem in Indian philosophy. In contrast, in western philosophy, from the early modern times mind has been contrasted with matter and hence the relation between becomes so very important in that context... Shocked to know that Professor Vaidya is no more with us. His works will continue to enrich those working to bring together Indian and Western philosophy in closer contact to each other.
🙏🏽💙
Rest in Peace 😞
🙏🏽💙
Language is the problem. No language, no hard problem. Pretty simple.
There is actually a great intellectual chasm between the ancient philosophers and the latter-day.scholars who developed their theories on the basis of the earlier works.
The passages of the Upanishads are extremely cryptic and poetical in nature and this resulted in some great misinterpretations. Lines such as "everything is Brahman" were taken literally missing the real intention behind such utterances. The word of the primary texts thus proved to be a great and impenetrable barrier. In the opinion of this writer, the foremost teachers and exponents of the philosophical schools -- at least some of them -- were perhaps aware of the true meaning, but even their own writings seem to have been misinterpreted!
There is therefore a great intellectual chasm - a chasm of language, of purport and of meaning.