The Choice

[Nick_A]

The last severl months have been extremely revealing and have clarified for me the importance of introducing Simone Weil into university dialogue. Although it is beginning to be done, her influence along with others with such understanding must grow since IMO it is essential if humanity is to survive.

I've learned of the complete hypocrisy of secularism primarily through the nastiness of atheism and secular Judaism, and the dogmatic egotism of secular Christianity or "Christendom." It seems the defining characteristic of secularism is to say one thing and do another. Secularism simply lacks the ability to impartially witness and admit its limitations. Socrates explained this years ago but secularism must deny it.

Socrates said he knew nothing and the Oracle considered him wise for such self appreciation. Socrates explains in the Apology:

“whenever I succeed in disproving another person's claim to wisdom in a given subject, the bystanders assume that I know everything about that subject myself. But the truth of the matter, gentlemen, is pretty certainly this, that real wisdom is the property of God, and this oracle is his way of telling us that human wisdom has little or no value. It seems to me that he is not referring literally to Socrates, but has merely taken my name as an example, as if he would say to us, The wisest of you men is he who has realised, like Socrates, that in respect of wisdom, he is really worthless.”

One of the greatest crimes of modern day secularism against the young is the gradual deprivation of what wisdom means. We know a great many things but the reason Socrates asserts that it is meaningless is because what is known lacks realistic context. We've collectively sunk so low that we no longer have a clue as to what this means.

For example, a person can know chess. They can know the laws of the game and how the pieces move. Yet their playing strength is weak. A strong player also knows chess but their knowledge contains a greater appreciation of context.

Socrates was willing to admit that he lacked context or the human perspective that is the path to wisdom or the ultimate in human context.

But admitting the human need for perspective suggests that we don't have it. This is too insulting to consider so we prefer to argue details or esxchange fanatsies. This is like playing bad chess It also suggests that wisdom already exists as an attribute of higher consciousness which is also poison for secularism that worships itself as a deity or the highest form of consciousness.

Consequently, the simple means by which people can grow in their capacity for wisdom or to put what we know into a higher more conscious context is denied simply because admitting the need is too insulting. Ethics replaces wisdom but is only an attribute of human nature governed by hypocrisy so must become its oppsite.

Socrates is right but that won't stop the arguments and hiding behind insult instead of admitting we know nothing and seeking the path to wisdom which is knowledge in higher context. The Buddhists understand this wisdom at its highest as dharma and people have to struggle against themselves to acquire it Our egotism would never allow it for the majority so wisdom can only be a property of a small minority needing and willing to be realistc.

Appreciating wisdom for knowledge in context or higher understanding reveals the depth of Simone Weil's following remark:

"The combination of these two facts – the longing in the depth of the heart for absolute good, and the power, though only latent, of directing attention and love to a reality beyond the world and of receiving good from it – constitutes a link which attaches every man without exception to that other reality. Whoever recognizes that reality recognizes that link. Because of it, he holds every human being without any exception as something sacred to which he is bound to show respect. This is the only possible motive for universal respect towards all human beings." Simone Weil

“Draft for A Statement of Human Obligations” SIMONE WEIL, AN ANTHOLOGY ed. Sian Miles

As a whole, we simply lack the ability to sustain such understanding so instead prefer to inulge in the fantasies of secularism. It is no wonder it exhibits such nastiness, dogmatism, and righteous indignation as it proclaims altuism. It is natural for hypocrisy as an atribute of the human condition that has come to devalue wisdom while replacing it with concepts of ethics to which we must become hypocritical.

So dear reader, you have a choice. You can follow the popular trend trend towards imagination, wonderful thoughts, and fantasy while patting the backs of those in agreement or you can seriously ponder the value of what Socrates means by human understanding in the context of wisdom and the analogy of Plato's cave. It isn't easy since it is very unpleasant and ego deflating to admit the human condition and that we know nothing. But for those in need of the experience of "meaning," beyond what secularism offers, it must be done. We must grow in this direction.

Of course I agree with Plato so will be part of efforts to introduce Simone Weil into philosophy clubs in honer of her 100th birthday 2/3/09 for students of philosophy interested in quality discussion. My experiences have revealed how essential it is. Naturally, your choice as to how you approach what you perceive as the human condition is for you to make.

[Tonyamendola]

I would suggest that you find a copy of "A Course In Miracles"


The most free place to be is "To not know"

What was seen as weakness becomes strength



Do I want to be right or do I want to be happy ?

[Nick_A]

Tony

You're a nice guy and you mean well but there is no way someone like me accepts ACIM. It features escapism which is part of the collective reason why we are sinking further into secularism.

For example ACIM does not understand attention as it pertains to the awakening process stressed by all the great traditions. When I read things like the following, I thank the powers that be that I didn't become involved with this:

Articles on A Course in Miracles: Name of God Meditation

Our attention is naturally drawn to those things we think can bring us happiness, or at least protect us from pain. When our eyes look at a particular scene, don't they automatically gravitate to perceived sources of pleasure? To put this differently, we give our attention to what we think can answer our prayers. Attention, then, is an expression of desire, and desire is prayer. When we place our attention on the things of this world-which is where we usually place it-we are in essence praying to those things, hoping that they can fill our needs and make us safe. Yet can they really answer our prayers? Can they bring us true happiness? According to the Course, the answer is an emphatic "no." Only God can bring us true joy. He is the only true Object of our desires. By giving our attention to things of this world, we are making them into false gods, substitutes for the only One Who can truly reward our attention. We are behaving like the ancient worshipper who prayed to a lifeless piece of stone that could neither hear nor answer his prayers.

What worries now is that only a few would seem to know the danger here. I don't mean to be critical but I value the crucial role attention plays for our conscious potential.. It has the capacity to allow us the necessary impartially for the experience that leads to a conscious perspective where one experiences human meaning and purpose.

The Buddha mind is in defilement. The desire is not escapism into a God concept. Simone Weil said simply that "Purity is the power to contemplate defilement." Such purity is only possible through the impartial power of attention. Such conscious attention is not desirable for the secular mind that seeks to go with the flow. It gets in the way since it reveals exactly what Plato is referring to.

I don't mean to be harsh but we are in precarious times. The great traditions that reveal their unique ways of developing a conscious perspective are being secularized to death and modern traditions lead to egoistic altruism that must become its opposite. More people must go deeper into their own traditions to uncover what has been lost for the sake of human "being" itself. Such people will always be a disturbing but beneficial influence in society.and surely not politically correct.

Take Simone Weil for example. She had incredible powers of attention. Did she hide in escapism because she came to realize secular life was meaningless and meaning for humanity was outside the domain of the earth? No, she purposely chose to experience it for what it is but with her conscious powers of detachment and attention. that kept her free of imagination. It was this that allowed her to become a person Albert Camus described as "Simone Weil, I still know this now, is the only great mind of our times"

She simply had the power to unify the sacred with the secular that is now separate. It has been attractive enough that she has risen from relative obscurity to now being taught in major universities.

More people are becoming aware that the secular mind and its platitudes is insufficient for anything beyond hypocrisy so needs the help of the sacred for awakening to a degree of its conscious potential. As of now, all this secularism insures we are headed for oblivion. I choose to be with those willing to admit the human condition, not hide in escapism, and strive to develop conscious awareness for their own good and the good of humanity.

[Tonyamendola]

Hi Nick

Thanks for your generous comments - I am certain we are all nice


I dont take any notice of interpretations of ACIM
from any of the "interpretors out there"

I expereinced what ACIM speaks of before i read the book, so I know its source
That said it was only offered and I respect your right to choose


Yet as the book itself states there are many paths home - I for one did not study it to expereince its goal - the expereince of SELF

It actually isnt escapism - It is asking us to take responsibility for our own thoughts
The real escapism is the denial of what our thoughts are capapble of



We will all find that in our time and that is times purpose

[Nick_A]

Hi Tony

Thanks for your generous comments - I am certain we are all nice

This is a perfect example of secular BS. I'm not being critical but we're just hopelessly in slavery to it. In reality we change. Some times during the day we are nice and at other times downright nasty. We of course blame it on circumstances but in reality it is the nature of our being to live in one emotional state and quickly change into another. All we can honestly say is that we are hypocrites.

We like to hide it and make pronouncements like we are all nice since it seems like the right thing to do but it actually only masks the truth of ourselves.

Albert Camus said that Simone Weil had a "lucid madness for truth." Many people think her odd for this madness. But in reality, is the dedication to live without escapism really madness or are we mad from so easily accepting the hypocrisy of our nature at the expense of the reality of the human condition and what is lost through denial into secular platitudes and escapism?

You want to say the "right" thing and I don't blame you. However, what is lost from being unable to either express or receive the truth of the human condition including our own? It assures we live in a dream.

The human condition is known in Christianity as the "world" and it is why it is said the world must hate what Jesus brought. It is the same with Plato's cave where Socrates remarks that anyone beginning to see the light will be ridiculed even to the point of death.

Someone wrote a book called "I'm OK, You're OK" which has sold many copies. If the title had been "I'm and idiot, You're an Idiot," how many books would have been sold? Yet it would be far closer to the truth. We have been conditioned to value the lie over reality.

Only a few in a generation are capable of Simone's lucid madness for truth but I maintain that it is essential that that a growing minority begin to take seriously what Christianity (not Christendom), Plato, and those like Simone Weil assert as to dealing with the human condition. Without it we will just row, row, row, our boats gently down the stream until we go over the falls into oblivion.

The path home doesn't come through escapism, fantasy or any other form of dominant imagination. It can only come as a result of the open impartial conscious experience of the human condition both in ourselves and in the world. Without this, everything turns in circles following the cycles of life as described in Ecclesiastes 3 including the perpetual cycles of war and peace.

[sendy47]

Nick...and what is your description of the human condition that you are not hiding from....

[Asimov]

GIGO

Dude, your fantastic misrepresentation of Plato's Allegory as well as your hard-lined absolutism regarding your object of worship Simone Weil is laughable at best, pitiful at worst.

I can't even begin to deconstruct your statements because they have absolutely no bearing in reality nor are they but mere assertions.

Anyone claiming that simple statements of opinion is "lucid madness for truth" needs to reevaluate their standards of truth and come to the realization that what is being said is utter garbage.

[Nick_A]

Originally Posted by sendy47

Nick...and what is your description of the human condition that you are not hiding from....

I am willing to admit that I am the wretched man as described in Romans 7 by St. Paul and someone attached to the shadows of Plato's cave as well as living in the Burning House described in the Buddhist parable of the burning house.. My only advantage is my willingness to admit it and to make the efforts necessary to begin to come to grips with it. I've learned by experience that virtually all the man made horrors in the world are a result of this inability to awaken to and admit the human condition or what we are. Our egotism denies our opportunity for conscious awareness and to be as we were meant to be rather than the inner chaotic plurality we've become.

Being that we are unwilling to witness and admit to what we are, nothing changes because hypocrisy and fear is a dominant part of what we are. No back patting and speeches about about peace and love have any significance whatsoever since the human condition denies it. Since we are as we are, everything is as it is. I know it is hard to swallow and very demeaning for our egotism yet it is the case and a person can verify it in themselves because our being attracts our life.

The shame of it is that it really doesn't have to be as bad as it is. It can be made better. We just don't have the awareness nor the humility to admit the problem yet that is where the solution begins.

Plato describes the balanced human being. If we are honest we see how far we are from it and without this balance we are slaves to imagination and no realistic conscious perspective can develop in a human being.

Later in book IV of the Republic, Plato writes that Socrates argued:

”…But in reality justice was such as we were describing, being
concerned however, not with the outward man, but with the inward, which
is the true self and concernment of man: for the just man does not permit
the several elements within him to interfere with one another, or any of
them to do the work of others, --he sets in order his own inner life, and is
his own master and his own law, and at peace with himself; and when he
has bound together the three principles within him, which may be
compared to the higher, lower, and middle notes of the scale, and the
intermediate intervals --when he has bound all these together, and is no
longer many, but has become one entirely temperate and perfectly
adjusted nature, then he proceeds to act, if he has to act, whether in a
matter of property, or in the treatment of the body, or in some affair of
politics or private business; always thinking and calling that which
preserves and co-operates with this harmonious condition, just and good
action, and the knowledge which presides over it, wisdom, and that which
at any time impairs this condition, he will call unjust action, and the opinion
which presides over it ignorance.”

I've experienced the utter uselessness of sugary platitudes and the nastiness of denial. It is time to appeal to the minority willing to be real at the expense of the joys and self justification of imagination, escapism, and egotism for their own being and to aid in providing the vital need for conscious awareness or "presence" for the good of society.

[Nick_A]

Originally Posted by Asimov

GIGO

Dude, your fantastic misrepresentation of Plato's Allegory as well as your hard-lined absolutism regarding your object of worship Simone Weil is laughable at best, pitiful at worst.

I can't even begin to deconstruct your statements because they have absolutely no bearing in reality nor are they but mere assertions.

Anyone claiming that simple statements of opinion is "lucid madness for truth" needs to reevaluate their standards of truth and come to the realization that what is being said is utter garbage.

You simply have no idea what this is about. The idea that a brilliant transcendent person lives their philosophy without resorting to imagination and escapism to expericnce truth as opposed to just BSing about it is ludicrous to you.

The fact that you think Albert Camus would call simple statements of opinion a "lucid madness for truth" means you have no idea what this is about.

You cannot deconstruct anything regarding this simply because you don't understand its construction.

[Astreja]

Originally Posted by Nick_A

So dear reader, you have a choice. You can follow the popular trend towards imagination, wonderful thoughts, and fantasy while patting the backs of those in agreement or you can seriously ponder the value of what Socrates means by human understanding in the context of wisdom and the analogy of Plato's cave.

I see a false dichotomy here.

I think we can have our imagination and our deep, troubling thoughts as well. As for myself, I prefer to experience life rather than analyze it.