Always enjoy Spinoza! “Most lead lives at worst so painful, at best so monotonous, poor and limited that the urge to escape, the longing to transcend themselves if only for a few moments, is and has always been one of the principle appetites of the soul.” ― Aldous Huxley
Can you please allow us access to all your original videos; they are/were excellent, very helpful. Not-sure why those "talks" are gone, guess you have your reasons. Please open them back up for public viewing.
When we are aware of thoughts such as "he should not have done so" or such thought-patterns, and even consider doing it consciously (instead of suppressing it by saying it is unspiritual) then we sense them as emotions or energy in a freeing way. Not just thought but even the wanting to think about it is an internal pressure that we miss by endlessly thinking uncosnciously.
Is it about understanding "anger" or doing it "consciously". Normally "anger" is fuelled and run by automatic thought process. We do not see if we could do "anger" with whole of our being and not let it be at expense of mechanical or automatic process. If I flee it does itself and I will be at the expense of it. We say "trying to understand", but that itself requires us to think(unconsciously or sleeping) about it--we do not stop and see with what am I trying to understand even--and so we miss the energy beneath these unconscious endeavors again and again.
difference between spinoza conatus and nietzsche will to power: conatus is our survival drive while will to power is the desire to expand(israeli expert to spinoza named Yirmiyahu Yovel exlplained it)
i would add that emotion is thought. You see someone scratching your car, you register it as bad/threatening via the knowledge you have about the cost of having ones car scratched, then that registration of "threat" fires up the activity in the body which produces that which we call anger. But that emotion, is no different from any other emotion, its an exertion of energy by the body, you register it as anger, and then that activates the knowledge of what one should do when angry. So really there is only one "emotion", which is the exertion of energy/resources by the body (to drive it towards survival), it has varying expressions which we have via thought categorized as different emotions even though its all the same thing, the will to surive/the will to power or whatever you want to call it. So in a way there is no exmotions at all, just the expenditure of resource by the body in certain specific patterns adapted to specific situations. not sure if im making my point across.
You have to hear about having your car scratched or maybe see it - eyes and ears are part of your body. The immediate response will also be in your body, a sinking feeling or whatever. If you suddenly see a lion charging you there will be no thought, just fear - a pounding heart, and fear in the pit of your stomach.
@@MartinButlers I guess im not making my point across. True if a lion is charging you, you wont even take a milli second to tell yourself that you are in a state fear, the body will automatically expend the resources needed to increase the chances of survival, heart rate will skyrocket and there there will be sensory activity in the chest/stomach because of the bodies chemical response, or whatever. But fear comes into being only when you call that activity fear, its a 4 letter word, it is thought. Only after you escape the lion will you register the experience of having been in a state of fear/discomfort, cause before thought has registered that there was fear, there is nobody there who was in fear, just the natural response/activity of the body. In the actual moment of being charged by a lion, you dont even control the body, youre not there , you dont tell it what to do, the body does what is neccesary, and if you survive, it was no thanks to you. Fear, anger, hate, love, pain, pleasure ....these categorizations are what you call emotions. But in reality, they are just patterns of the same drive, the survival drive, at the core they work the same way, they pull the body towards certain direction, towards certain action, to expend energy in a particular way. You (the cultural value system) makes up the story of someone having been in fear, been angry etc. Im not sure if youve listened to an indian guy called U.G krishnamurti, but he makes these points across very well. The knowledge structure that is there in your "shitbox" as ug called it, weaves together your experience, your story, it filters the sensory activity through the cultural framework. If the cultural framework was not there, there would be no experiencer, no story being weaved together, just the sensory activity of the body by itself.
@@UsefullThing312 he's talked about UG many times before so he's well acquainted with his work. I do see your point though. Labels are only that. Fear greed envy anger etc all stem from the body's reaction to exterior stimuli
@@ciararespect4296 So even though there is physical activity of the body, like the sensory input and the resulting chemical/locomotive activity, the emotion itself i say is the registration made by the experiencing structure/thoughts/labels/cultural value system/framework/software/worldmind, whatever you want to call it). Im not saying that "registration" is seperate from the physical input/output, infact its one unitary movement, But the reason i say emotion is thought, is simply because emotion (by my definition) needs an experiencer, and without thought creating the illusory structure of an individual, of a self, there is no experiencer. Just the sensory data flowing from the bodies activity. ...If that makes sense.
@@UsefullThing312 yes we have skin in the game so to speak and are the experiencer. I'm. Not too sure on what spinoza had to say but will delve more into it but I think he says by reason we can entangle ourselves from our emotions. That is not ignore them but rationally study them using our reasoning powers in the endeavor to lessen their effects on us
People who pretend to believe in free will are really clowns. But unfortunately even Stephen Hawking couldn't be honest about this. So many people prefer to get praise from the masses rather than saying uncomfortable truths. I have been the opposite my whole life, but I'm in the minority.
will cannot be there unless "conscious non-effort" on "unconscious futile efforts" is made. We are clowns for the fact we just need to eat the frosting before even seeing let alone holding the cake. We want to showoff or convince ourselves as the source of positive doings without having to earn for it with blood and sweat of conscious-non-efforts.
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
Great explanation. I've studied psychology all my life, I'm 85 now, and I find myself in absolute agreement with all Spinoza has said!
The supreme truth of this podcast is reflected in how few have reacted or commented on it.
The truth is quite unpalatable to the masses.
Coming back to this brilliant presentation...
Thank you.
Always enjoy Spinoza!
“Most lead lives at worst so painful, at best so monotonous, poor and limited that the urge to escape, the longing to transcend themselves if only for a few moments, is and has always been one of the principle appetites of the soul.” ― Aldous Huxley
what book is that quote from?
Wow, haven't started this one yet, but I was just thinking of Spinoza today. Thanks for the lengthy upload, Martin! Made my night.
Amazing how you tie it all together. Thank you for the podcast. I'll listen to this one more than a few times.
The majority of findings in psychology cannot be repeated.
Can you please allow us access to all your original videos; they are/were excellent, very helpful. Not-sure why those "talks" are gone, guess you have your reasons. Please open them back up for public viewing.
Thank uu for this amazing video well well explanatory
Who would have thought 👏🏼🙏🏼
When we are aware of thoughts such as "he should not have done so" or such thought-patterns, and even consider doing it consciously (instead of suppressing it by saying it is unspiritual) then we sense them as emotions or energy in a freeing way. Not just thought but even the wanting to think about it is an internal pressure that we miss by endlessly thinking uncosnciously.
Is it about understanding "anger" or doing it "consciously". Normally "anger" is fuelled and run by automatic thought process. We do not see if we could do "anger" with whole of our being and not let it be at expense of mechanical or automatic process. If I flee it does itself and I will be at the expense of it. We say "trying to understand", but that itself requires us to think(unconsciously or sleeping) about it--we do not stop and see with what am I trying to understand even--and so we miss the energy beneath these unconscious endeavors again and again.
''you are not responsible for your thought'' - Hoyte van Hoytema
He mentions Ouspensky in one of his books, so He knew about the fourthway.
Good broadcast, instructive. But reality maybe is more complicated than that.
One psychology teacher in my university told class that if one understands Spinoza one also understands 50% of psychology
The second you mentioned Sam Vaknin I liked this!
difference between spinoza conatus and nietzsche will to power: conatus is our survival drive while will to power is the desire to expand(israeli expert to spinoza named Yirmiyahu Yovel exlplained it)
i would add that emotion is thought. You see someone scratching your car, you register it as bad/threatening via the knowledge you have about the cost of having ones car scratched, then that registration of "threat" fires up the activity in the body which produces that which we call anger. But that emotion, is no different from any other emotion, its an exertion of energy by the body, you register it as anger, and then that activates the knowledge of what one should do when angry. So really there is only one "emotion", which is the exertion of energy/resources by the body (to drive it towards survival), it has varying expressions which we have via thought categorized as different emotions even though its all the same thing, the will to surive/the will to power or whatever you want to call it. So in a way there is no exmotions at all, just the expenditure of resource by the body in certain specific patterns adapted to specific situations.
not sure if im making my point across.
You have to hear about having your car scratched or maybe see it - eyes and ears are part of your body. The immediate response will also be in your body, a sinking feeling or whatever. If you suddenly see a lion charging you there will be no thought, just fear - a pounding heart, and fear in the pit of your stomach.
@@MartinButlers I guess im not making my point across. True if a lion is charging you, you wont even take a milli second to tell yourself that you are in a state fear, the body will automatically expend the resources needed to increase the chances of survival, heart rate will skyrocket and there there will be sensory activity in the chest/stomach because of the bodies chemical response, or whatever. But fear comes into being only when you call that activity fear, its a 4 letter word, it is thought. Only after you escape the lion will you register the experience of having been in a state of fear/discomfort, cause before thought has registered that there was fear, there is nobody there who was in fear, just the natural response/activity of the body. In the actual moment of being charged by a lion, you dont even control the body, youre not there , you dont tell it what to do, the body does what is neccesary, and if you survive, it was no thanks to you.
Fear, anger, hate, love, pain, pleasure ....these categorizations are what you call emotions. But in reality, they are just patterns of the same drive, the survival drive, at the core they work the same way, they pull the body towards certain direction, towards certain action, to expend energy in a particular way. You (the cultural value system) makes up the story of someone having been in fear, been angry etc. Im not sure if youve listened to an indian guy called U.G krishnamurti, but he makes these points across very well. The knowledge structure that is there in your "shitbox" as ug called it, weaves together your experience, your story, it filters the sensory activity through the cultural framework. If the cultural framework was not there, there would be no experiencer, no story being weaved together, just the sensory activity of the body by itself.
@@UsefullThing312 he's talked about UG many times before so he's well acquainted with his work. I do see your point though. Labels are only that. Fear greed envy anger etc all stem from the body's reaction to exterior stimuli
@@ciararespect4296 So even though there is physical activity of the body, like the sensory input and the resulting chemical/locomotive activity, the emotion itself i say is the registration made by the experiencing structure/thoughts/labels/cultural value system/framework/software/worldmind, whatever you want to call it).
Im not saying that "registration" is seperate from the physical input/output, infact its one unitary movement, But the reason i say emotion is thought, is simply because emotion (by my definition) needs an experiencer, and without thought creating the illusory structure of an individual, of a self, there is no experiencer. Just the sensory data flowing from the bodies activity. ...If that makes sense.
@@UsefullThing312 yes we have skin in the game so to speak and are the experiencer.
I'm. Not too sure on what spinoza had to say but will delve more into it but I think he says by reason we can entangle ourselves from our emotions. That is not ignore them but rationally study them using our reasoning powers in the endeavor to lessen their effects on us
Martin you are true sage, have been listening to you for 5 years now. I want to ask what you think of David Benetars work regarding antinatalism?
People who pretend to believe in free will are really clowns. But unfortunately even Stephen Hawking couldn't be honest about this. So many people prefer to get praise from the masses rather than saying uncomfortable truths. I have been the opposite my whole life, but I'm in the minority.
will cannot be there unless "conscious non-effort" on "unconscious futile efforts" is made. We are clowns for the fact we just need to eat the frosting before even seeing let alone holding the cake. We want to showoff or convince ourselves as the source of positive doings without having to earn for it with blood and sweat of conscious-non-efforts.
Reason can never never apprehend God. We need a leap of faith, to experience God and Miracles. Thanks for making the world intelligible to me.
You are missing the point, I think. Did Spinoza mention god or faith or leap of faith?