Hundreds of short, one sentence descriptions of what famous philosophers say philosophy is or is about. Useful for children, pupils, interested in philosophy.
WHAT is art? Classificatory disputes.. Classificatory disputes about what is art Art historians and philosophers of art have long had classificatory disputes about art regarding whether a particular cultural form or piece of work should be classified as art. Disputes about what does and does not count as art continue to occur today -/- Defining art is difficult if not impossible. Aestheticians and art philosophers often engage in disputes about how to define art. By its original and broadest definition, art (...) (from the Latin ars, meaning “skill” or “craft”) is the product or process of the effective application of a body of knowledge, most often using a set of skills; this meaning is preserved in such phrases as “liberal arts” and “martial arts”. However, in the modern use of the word, which rose to prominence after 1750, “art” is commonly understood to be skill used to produce an aesthetic result (Hatcher, 1999). (shrink)
Exploration of phenomena that need to be considered so as to conceptualize consciousness types of different biological organisms or living things, levels, dimensions, aims, types, stages of the process of consciousness and organs involved.
-/- Letter to a friend : Creative Thinking and Intuition Letter to a friend about creative thinking and intuition (art, writing, philosophy, science, etc ) .
A conceptual exploration of the umbrella notion Wisdom, as well as dimensions, characteristics and components of the idea of wisdom as suggested by experimental philosophy, neurosciences and other studies and a comparison of the notion of wisdom with those of knowledge, truth, insight and understanding. -/- Keywords: philosophy, knowledge, wisdom, truth, Gettier problem, ibnsights, truth, understanding, knowledge, Experimental philosophy, neuroscience of wisdom -/- Suggested Citation: -/- de Balbian, Ulrich, Philosophy = Philo Sophos = Love of Wisdom (August 24, 2017). Available (...) at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3025568. (shrink)
Determinism from the 1st and 3rd person perspective as well as the universal point of reference aee dealt with. This is to show the absence of free will in the last perspective and the illusion of it when seen from the first two perspectives. ‘Free’ choice is dealt with as well as the absence of free will and the consequences of determinism for law and court judgements are explored. So, what if any, is the place and the role of God (...) in all this? Did s/he create determinism and the potential for or any semblance of choice and free will? Or is the existence of God.. (shrink)
Philosophy is the making of theories, badly or occasionally better, with sets of concepts.It resembles fiction, poetry and literature and theology in certain ways in so far as the author uses his imagination and intuition to produce a set of ideas that may or may not attempt to refer to and/or represent or reflect and create a certain reality or life-world.It differs from fiction and is relatively unique in so far as it employs reasoning, argumentation and other philosophical tools.It seems (...) as if philosophy is self-incestuous, conceptual games with and about concepts using propositions, reasoning and argumentation to make assertions about other concepts, and thereby produce insular, enclosed, self-referential, circular systems of ideas. (shrink)
The tools employed might appear appropriate, the reasoning sound and argumentation valid, but the subject-matter, well one wonders what that has to do with philosophy, if anything at all? Viewing some of the topics one really wonders of the notion of philosophy is not stretched too far? So much that is passed off as philosophy itself or some kind of so-called interdisciplinary issues really appear as irrelevant. tempt to interpret, perceive and treat as if they a Topics from the grievance (...) studies especially fall under this. It seems as if individuals have personal issues, obsessions and psychological, social and cultural problems that they are philosophical and/or philosophically related. I wish to suggest that those issues are treated as disciplines or subjects in their own right, for example racism, feminism and gender studies, but not as if they have anything to do with philosophy or should be treated in a philosophical manner. As if they inform us about profound philosophical issues or concerns. Perhaps aspects of them can be dealt with as psychological, anthropological, sociological, biological, political, etc, but dealing with them as if they provide us with some kind of profound philosophical ideas and insights might be stretching the notion of philosophy a bit too far.I’ve wondered about the seeming dichotomy of materialism/physicalism and panpsychism and if they are really the only possible consciousness explanatory positions? How about biologism? That is as if all living biological matter or organisms are conscious, as well as that consciousness (the many types of it) can be explained best by the nature of those phenomena. A biologically restricted form or modification of pan-psychism? The consciousness section is an attempt to provide guidelines for the conceptualization of different meanings of consciousness. When they have been identified they can be explored, for example the nature of the different types, on different levels and in different dimensions, the nature of the processes, aims, objectives, functions. These are mere beginnings. When they have been investigated, can one perhaps begin to develop hypotheses and theories about features, processes, causes, functions, the organs involved, etc. (shrink)
All that remains of Western Philosophy is the History of Ideas. 1 Ulrich de Balbian Meta-Philosophy Research Center ( Meta-Philosophy) Death of Philosophy Part 1 (essays on philosophy, it subject-matter, methods, omtology, metaphysics, episetemology, art, religion and other topics).
Mind, Consciousness and Body -/- We do not know how to think with or about these notions and others such as reality, perception, space, time, etc… In the following I will deal with the umbrella notions of mind, consciousness and body. The contents is relevant, but of greater importance is the manner or method in which I deal with these notions. I first present as an illustration of my approach or method, how I have dealt with the notions of intuition (...) and intuiting. One of the points I am trying to make is that: we do not know how to think about many things, for example mind, consciousness, awareness, body, intuition, etc. Therefore, I attempt to explore a number of things that we must investigate and deal with before we use these and other notions, as if they are clearly defined terms, before we try to use them to think and to think about anything, especially many leveled and multi- dimensional issues and problems such as the workings of ‘the mind, the body, intuition, consciousness and the relationship, if there are any, between these and other things. Then I suggest the initial steps for a few very basic requirements before the exploration of a theory of embodied, living, conscious tissues and a model for embodied (self-) consciousness research. CONTENTS -/- Intuition 4 -/- Mind 9 -/- Consciousness 19 -/- Embodied Consciousness 44 -/- Human Body 52 -/- Theory 61 -/- Proposal for a Model of Embodied Consciousness Research 86 -/- Self or Reflective Consciousness 90. (shrink)
The tools employed might appear appropriate, the reasoning sound and argumentation valid, but the subject-matter, well one wonders what that has to do with philosophy, if anything at all? Viewing some of the topics one really wonders of the notion of philosophy is not stretched too far? So much that is passed off as philosophy itself or some kind of so-called interdisciplinary issues really appear as irrelevant. Topics from the grievance studies especially fall under this. It seems as if individuals (...) have personal issues, obsessions and psychological, social and cultural problems that they attempt to interpret, perceive and treat as if they are philosophical and/or philosophically related. I wish to suggest that those issues are treated as disciplines or subjects in their own right, for example racism, feminism and gender studies, but not as if they have anything to do with philosophy or should be treated in a philosophical manner. As if they inform us about profound philosophical issues or concerns. Perhaps aspects of them can be dealt with as psychological, anthropological, sociological, biological, political, etc, but dealing with them as if they provide us with some kind of profound philosophical ideas and insights might be stretching the notion of philosophy a bit too far. I’ve wondered about the seeming dichotomy of materialism/physicalism and panpsychism and if they are really the only possible consciousness explanatory positions? How about biologism? That is as if all living biological matter or organisms are conscious, as well as that consciousness (the many types of it) can be explained best by the nature of those phenomena. A biologically restricted form or modification of pan-psychism? Part II What is Philosophy by Philosophers a Compilation. (shrink)
A VISUAL GUIDE TO THE WORKS OF THE ULRICH DE BALBIAN FINE ART FOUNDATION au natural I am/was hardly known in my life time, apart from a few thousand on Linkedin, my 2 blogs, Facebook, Instagram - because I live as a hermit, removed from all social life, so that I can just paint, paint and paint - and reflect and write (philosophy and sociology of life, existence, culture, art). I create, as I live, as if there is no human (...) being who interferes, intervenes, creates (paints) - as if every- thing just happens, ‘just is’ - like water flows, the ocean, a tree grows (or dies) in the forest, like light creates colours, gravity and other natural forces. Like Zen Buddhists, Christian and other mystics, Jains, Sufis - we just leave everything as we find it. This is what all arts have ever attempted to do. But, especially and more specifically so-called modern, contemporary and (post-) post-modern art, Critical Theory, (post) deconstruction attempt to, and all philosophy tried to depict by means of reflection on first order existence - as if, it merely mirrors and reflects what it comes across. Nowadays many artist are aware of this, previously few reflected on this. All creatives are/were aware of this attitude, the state of mind, this style of conscious awareness, this way of 'just being', all mystics knew that - realizing the Buddha mind, being oned with Eckhart's Godhead, the one real self of Vedan- ta, the Father of Jesus, etc, etc. The human mind treats smaller paintings as if it is looking AT an object or a thing such as a table or chair , but larger works are experienced (like installations) as if one is part of them and participate in them. Now that you know this please do not treat these images as if they are just more objects or things you look AT, but experience and participate in them. (shrink)
An exploration of the umbrella notion 'knowledge' and related notions, truth, wisdom, knowing, insights, understanding, perception, etc. The philosophical approach, such as that of Gettier, to this notion.
LIMITS OF HUMAN SENSES, Consciousness and Awareness -/- ULRICH DE BALBIAN -/- Meta-Philosophy Research Center My art makes the invisible visible, limits of human awareness -/- 1 Human consciousness and awareness is restricted by stereotypes and notions that cause philosophers and artists to exist in the dark ages as far as their perception and understanding of human inner and outer senses are concerned. Humans perceive 7 colors of rainbows with 16 to 37 or more colors, that are perceived by other (...) organisms, for example certain sea creatures. (shrink)
1 1 Ulrich de Balbian Meta-Philosophy Research Center (Meta-Philosophy) Death of Philosophy Part 2 PART 2 Philosophy subject-matter page2 Different approaches to doing philosophy (Methods) page 164 Metaphysics, Ontology, Epistemology page.
My new (Experimental) PHILOSOPHY (XPhi) book for FREE download -/- https://www.academia.edu/31973890/_Meta-Philosophy_Theorizing_about_Philosophy_CMT_CB_and_CM_as_an_e xercise_inXPhi -/- (Meta-Philosophy) Theorizing about Philosophy (CMT, CB and CMA) as an exercise inXPhi -/- The processes of theorizing are explored, Weick's Conceptual Metaphor Theory, Conceptual Blending Theory and Conceptual Metaphor tool are described. This Meta-Philosophy investigation of philosophy and philosophizing is an exercise in Experimental Philosophy. The Empirical Generalization or Hypothesis arrived at states that: Philosophy/izing is like or resembles the process/es of Theorizing.
The intended title was “Universe Oriented Ontology” or “Multiverse Oriented Ontology”, or “Universe or Multiverse Metaphysics”. I mention this as it gives an idea about the meaning and intention of the title and the work as well as the titles I considered and why I moved away from them to the present one. The sub-title provides a further hint towards the intentions of the work, namely: ” Beyond Earth- and Human-centricity’. I opted for ‘transcending’ rather than beyond, as I am (...) still in the process of describing the process of transcending and many of the ideas I am obliged to use from our conceptual system and practices are still earth- and anthropo-centered, And, they have not yet gone to a state beyond those two -isms. I say something about universe-centeredness, then about planet earth as point and frame of reference and anthropo-centricity. The socio-cultural practice of philosophy and the doing of philosophy is merely one of many human, social and cultural practices. I post different notions of philosophy by a number of writers, some of them philosophers. These notions are about their perceptions of what philosophy is. Few of them go into detail about the subject-matter of philosophy. No one really deal with the aims, purposes and objectives of the discipline and none deal with the nature of the doing of philosophy or philosophizing. Activities that I suggest resemble certain features of the processes of theorizing. I end with explorations of possible characteristics of original- and creative thinkers. I do this by mentioning a number of themes of meta-philosophy listed and described by Peter Suber. I make a number of comments in them and highlight aspects relevant to these type of thinkers. One find them of course in all disciplines and socio-cultural [racticesand disciplines be they the arts,humanities, sciences, etc. I am of course specifically concerned with original andcreative thinkers inthe Western tradition of philosophy. As I am a radical and absolute sceptic, I end with an article on this theme. It is said by everyone, for example Hume, Russell and Pascal, that such a radical position is psychologically impossible and that it cannot be lived 24/7. Pascal for example opted for believe or faith and he and a number of writers suggest that that is the only way out and the final position of radical sceptics. I disagree with him. (shrink)
First 26 pages of my forthcoming book Meta-Philosophy Part 3 Metaphysics, ontology, meta-ontology, philosophy of philosophy, philosophical methods, cognitive sciences and much else.
Many themes and topics, both immanent as well as non- immanent, concerning philosophy and meta-philosophy are dealt with. Many of these take the form of my answers to questions addressed at me. Some of the topics and themes that are dealt with are - Self-reference and Self-application Immanence and non-immanence Disagreement and diversity Primacy of the practical Philosophy good and bad Philosophy and expertise Ends of philosophy Death of philosophy Anti-philosophies Philosophy and assertion Philosophy and exposition Philosophy and style.
How does anything become philosophy? How does anything become philosophically relevant? What is it that makes something, any thing, philosophically relevant? What are the ingredients or components of something philosophical? What must such a thing contain so as to be philosophically relevant? How can one make anything of relevance to the discourse of philosophy? What is it that makes anything and/or thought or idea of and about anything philosophical. and of philosophical relevance? What is the nature, the characteristics and components (...) of the methods, the techniques, approach, questions, etc that enable something to be made philosophy, and philosophically relevant? How is it 4 Quests, questions and questioning 8 Philosophical tools 19 (The many) Aims of philosophizing 24 Individuals & Intersubjectivity 27. (shrink)
Meta-philosophical investigation of the nature, aims, methods of philosophy. Original, creative-thinking vs derivative , secondary thinking. Exploration of the limits of the philosophical discourse by subject-matter or fields shared with other disciplines eg logic, thinking, cognition, arguments, etc. Inter-disciplinary topics and issues can lead philosophers to become involved in other disciplines and thereby destroy the philosophical discourse and philosophizing.
Traditional philosophy is no longer viable, relevant and acceptable. It might be possible to continue doing philosophizing in traditional ways. It is possible to continue fabricating fictional realities in the manner of the Pre-Socratics, Spinoza, Leibniz, Husserl, Hegel, Plato, et al. It is possible to devise pictures of realities and depictions of human consciousness and cognition like Descartes or in the Kantian manner. -/- One of the major issues with traditional philosophy is its lack of self-awareness, the absence of meta-cognition. (...) This lack of meta-cognition of traditional philosophers leads to the creation of all sorts of questionable phenomena and fake problems. -/- Traditional philosophy, metaphysics, ontology, epistemology, ethics, philosophy of sciences, religion, arts, etc are little more than the possibilities, limits and restrictions enabled and allowed by the philosopher's methodology, techniques and tools. -/- It is most likely possible to envisage a project to devise a collection or synthesis of many alternative realities by means of the insights and theories of theoretical physics, mathematics, bio-chemistry, biology and other sciences, the depictions produced by the arts and pictures of realities presented by the humanities. If such a system of pictures of reality is philosophically relevant and meaningful is however another matter. -/- The original, creative thinking philosopher constitutes alternattive or new realities by his philosophizing. This philosophizing employs and resembles aspects and stages of the processes of theorizing. -/- The real goal of philosophizing is to increase ever greater wisdom. Not merely wisdom in an abstract sense, but different kinds of practical and applied wisdom in all areas of human, everyday existence. In other words, like spirituality and mysticism philosophizing attempts to embody or incarnate wisdom. While mysticism or the mystical paths and aspects of religions aspire to unity experience, to become one with THE ONE, to become the ONE, REAL SELF, to realize the Buddha mind or to be united or 'married' to the Beloved of Sufism. (shrink)
https://www.academia.edu/32135680/There_is_no_such_things_as_Mind_or_Consciousness -/- ABSTRACT The introduction presents merely roughly (as they undergo change all the time) the contemporary, insular, Anglo-Phone speculations (supposedly by means of the discourse of philosophy and the socio-cultural practice of philosophizing) about notions of consciousness and mind. -/- These, almost epistemological solipsistic, self-centered and anthropo-centered, restricted speculations about the notions of mind and consciousness are made by means of cognitively biased metaphysical, ontological, epistemological and methodological assumptions and selective interpretations of the nature and the doing of philosophy. (...) Individuals or groups of them uttering those speculations form part of the professional academe and subscribe to the principles, attitudes, values and norms of a particular school, movement and community of Western academic philosophers. -/- The next sections situate the individuals who utter these pronouncements and/ or argue for them by reasoning, logic and argumentation in the wider context of the multiverse, the universe, planet earth and our species as merely one type of contingent, living organism inhabiting and restricted to a certain eon, era, period, epoch, civilization, historical period and culture (or time and place) of this planet. In spite of this absolute restriction by place and time individuals try to depict from this restricted point of view an all-inclusive, god-like explanation of the nature, origin, meaning and functioning of every thing. -/- I suggest that because of conceptual misuse mental objects such as the mind and consciousness are imagined and thought to exist. Such misleading notions lead to the creation of unnecessary ‘philosophical’ problems such as the mind-body problem and notions about things such as ‘qualia’. It is advisable to restrict any experiments to an investigation of particular senses and ‘acts’ of cognition and identify the areas in the body and brain that play a part in them - and to leave such research to experts of the specialized cognitive and neuroscientific fields and related disciplines, instead of trying to speculate about them or by the use of thought experiments, imaginary cases and simulations, fictional accounts and reasoning or arguments. (shrink)
ABSTRACT It can be summarized as the Why of Doing philosophy and the How of Doing Philosophy. For this purpose I deal with the notion of Consciousness. Not, to develop or advocate yet another idea about this notion, nor to present another speculation about how everything is conscious or that all thinI deal with a number of meta-philosophical issues and ideas. gs are physical, or any of the possible positions in between these two poles. I merely mention this issue so (...) as to illustrate what and how philosophy will deal with it. I then deal with some of the possible reasons and factors why certain individuals feel the intense need, motivation and obligation to philosophize. I focus on the Western tradition of philosophy and on original- and creative philosophers. In other words, I do not deal with those involved in academic institutions and professionals. The reason for this being that they teach, study, criticize and use the ideas of other thinkers and for academic related reasons, rather than those of original- and creative thinkers. I then deal with ideas about the nature and origins of our universe, as one possible universe, in a possible multiverse. Again, the reason for this is not to support or advocate any of the models, but to try and identify what is philosophically involved and to show how one will deal with them philosophically by questioning, argumentation and reasoning. Many people think when they talk about their every day lives, relationships and other aspects of their minute, little worlds, they are doing philosophy. Some of the fashionable issues that are favoured at the moment are: racism, gender, feminism, men and colonialism. Such people think their attitudes, beliefs and opinions about these flavour of the month topics are philosophy. Let them have their obsessions and concerns, let them turn them into academic subjects and qualifications, let them do post-doctorate research and write endless books about them, but do not involve me. How can I do philosophy as - there are things I do not know, there are things that I do notknow of and there are things that will be know and thought in future that I will never be aware of. Multi-sensory, embodied, consciousness (or mind) and minded or conscioussed, multi-sensory bodies of living organisms can said to be poles of a continuum (2 perspectives). Mind and body are often viewed in isolation, as unintegrated, dualistic phenomena, thus leading to false problems and -isms. I deal with issues concerning the origins of our universe for examplethe mediocrity principle and the anthropic principle, fine-tuning hypothesis. These three ideas, principles or hypotheses are of interest for a number of philosophical reasons, so I will mention what they are about. (shrink)
Why_read_Philosophy_of_original-_and_creative-thinking_rather_than_derivative_academic_professionals _ Meta-Philosophy and Philosophy’s rationale, aims, subject-matter and methods. What is philosophy for the creative-, original-thinking philosopher? Why is he doing philosophy? Where does his philosophical problems and insights come from? Comparing speculative/revisionary metaphysics, descriptive metaphysics and the explorative ‘metaphysics’ of the Socratic Method and the Philosophical Investigations. Comments on, or thinking through and with philosophical problems that cannot be dis/solved, Suber’s Meta-philosophy themes and questions, surveys of philosophers (and their believes) and Plant’s ‘On the Domain of Meta-philosophy’. Socio-cultural, psychological (...) and other factors related to the doing of philosophy. (shrink)
If you wish to think/write about many dimensional things like the ‘world’, persons, consciousness, human thinking etc, you should at least think multi-dimensional and many levelled. Questioning the purpose, the subject-matter and the methodology, methods of the discipline. I have already dealt in detail about the disappearance of different subject from the philosophical discourse with the differentiation of other disciplines, as well as the involvement in philosophy in inter-disciplinary areas such as cognitive sciences, the creation of experimental philosophy and the (...) philosophies of other discourses, eg art, religion, science, mathematics, sport and every subject possible. Philosophy has/is often interpreted as consisting of logic, which in has its own discourse, while other aspects or forms of logic really form part of mathematics. The doing of philosophy as the doing of (usually informal) logic is in some way related to this belief. As far as the method of philosophy goes, it is always seen as employing arguments, argumentation and reasoning. But all kinds of writing and talking employ arguments, argumentation, reasoning and informal logic – not just philosophy. I conclude with a discussion from theoretical physics (in the past associated with the philosophical discourse) that provides us with ontologies as philosophy used to do. Against that background I present articles on the multiverse, more conventional articles on our universe, our world, our physical reality and the origins of life. I think these are some of the many things that it is necessary that philosophy should take note of and consequently question itself, its aims, objectives, subject-matter and methodologies. We might then have something different than one-levelled and one-dimensional thinking and more many layered and levelled and multi-dimensional thinking. Is this not how our consciousness functions? On many levels, layers and dimensions simultaneously? So should this not be the manner in which we conceive of ‘it’, its nature and functioning? We, philosophy, should at least be thinking ( instead of individual concepts, or statements, linear thinking - we should simultaneously think on many layers, on many levels and in several dimensions) in terms of 3D, for example 3D scatter plots .By this I mean the many different aspects of the person (mentally and physically, socially, culturally, as well as our environment, planetary and universe context should be included in every concept we employ; each concept should therefore be at least like a 3D scatter plot image, including all these levels and information). (shrink)
A Meta-Philosophy exploration of immanent and non-immanent features of first-order philosophy in terms of the values of non- values or negative values of Radical Scepticism, Nihilism and Minarchy, executed to show how philosophizing is done. -/- It misleadingly seems as if there is no progress in philosophy as, like in visual art, literature and music, each original thinker re-invents the entire discipline, its aims, purposes, values, methods, etc The nature of philosophical tools, methods, techniques and skills will be investigated and (...) applied in terms of radical scepticism. -/- This approach, set of values and attitude restrict the nature and the style of the meta-philosophizing. It will for example prevent the traditional development of a general, all-encompassing and all-inclusive metaphysical system. It also demands the focus on context-specific investigation of questions and the dealing of a particular problem in a certain context. -/- These limits require the re-interpretation of any philosophical tool being employed as well as the underlying assumptions and any pre-suppositions. -/- As far as possible philosophizing as an aspect of the processes of theorizing will be adhered to and realized. In chapter THREE I illustrate many-leveled and multi-dimensional thinking, that are to me as a visual artist as well, of extreme importance. These are the types of things employed by radical skepticism and that should be the form of philosophizing instead of and replacing traditional one-leveled and one-dimensional thinking, argumentation and reasoning. (shrink)
A study of the methods, approaches, prayers, etc to realize the 'unity experience' with THE ONE REAL SELF (Vedanta, Hinduism, ) God (Judaism), Gottheit (Christianity), Buddha mind (Buddhism), The Beloved (Sufism, Islam) of a number of mystics from several religious traditions. I wrote about this in a number of books and articles, for example about methods, techniques, practices and methodology here: as well as exploring and illustrating the subject-matter of philosophizing here: Explorations, questions and searches not put down on paper (...) are probably more important than the ones mentioned above. These were occurrences for almost as long as I can remember. They took many forms, endless questions about everything under the sun, unsatisfied with unexplained socio-cultural institutions, communities, social relationships, social roles, behaviour, values, norms and much more – I had to question them rather than merely submit to them or act in accordance with them. Although I expressed these questions and queries about the status quo in many areas such as sport, art, social sciences, endless reading and marginal groups and relationships I realized that they form part of the philosophical discourse. Not the discourse that has become the expression of the professionalization of philosophy the last few hundred years, but of the not-institutionalized practice of original thinking, of creative philosophical thinking. As examples of the latter, Socrates, of course, the pre-Socratics, Plato, Leibniz, Spinoza, Kant, Hegel, Plotinus, writers on Mysticism such as Meister Eckhart, van Ruysbroeck, John of the Cross, Teresa of Avila, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, from Advaita, Zen and other Buddhist schools, Wittgenstein, Hume, German Idealists, Rumi, novelists and poets, Paul Klee and other visual artists and many names who form part of the seeking for the unity-experience as explored in History of Mysticism (those who seek the unity experience, to become ONE with THE ONE, Godhead, the one real Self, Buddha mind, Sophos, etc). History of Mysticism *was first published by Atma Books in 1987, now and is a unique compendium of the lives and teachings of the world's best known mystics. They are presented in chronological order, and include representatives of every religious tradition, revealing the broad universality of genuine religious experience. expanded and revised Thirtieth Anniversary edition is available as a free downloadable PDF document on this website at my Downloads page. This book is fundamental for seasoned scholars of philosophy and religion as well as anyone new to the study of Mysticism. (shrink)
This book includes a study of writers on mysticism, mystics and mysticism for world religions and the nature and stages of the mystical journey. This contents show some of the mystic studied - I. Mystics of The Ancient Past -/- Pre-history Of Mysticism Vedic Hymnists Early Egyptians The Early Jews Upanishadic Seers Kapila The Bhagavad Gita The Taoist Sages The Buddha -/- II. Mystics of The Greco-Roman Era -/- The Pre-Socratic Greeks Socrates And His Successors Zeno of Citium Philo Judaeus (...) Jesus of Nazareth Early Christians The Gnostics The Hermetics Plotinus III. Mystics of The Early Middle Ages -/- Pseudo-Dionysius Narada Patanjali The Tantra Shankara Dattatreya Milarepa The Ch’an And Zen Buddhists The Sufis Al-Hallaj -/- IV. Mystics of The Late Middle Ages -/- Jewish Mysticism Ibn Arabi Iraqi Rumi Jnaneshvar Medieval Christians Meister Eckhart Thomas á Kempis -/- V. Mystics of The Modern Era -/- Nicholas of Cusa Juan de la Cruz (St. John of the Cross) Kabir Nanak Dadu Seventeenth And Eighteenth Century Mystics Sri Ramakrishna Ramana Maharshi Swami Rama Tirtha Twentieth Century Mystics Conclusion . (shrink)
What I see when I come across that what is presented as philosophy is talking about the ideas and often technical terms of others and from the the tradition of philosophy. The latter is not original thinking but a sort of scholarly approach.. Immediately when I encounter someone using technical terms and words to talk about the ideas in philosophy and the work of other philosophers I realize that this is not original and creative thinking but scholarly work and intentions. (...) That type of work leads to and forms part of the domains, intentions, concerns, interests, aims and objectives of other disciplines, disciplines, other than philosophy. -/- For example semantics, linguistics, signs, logic, critical thinking, mathematics, consciousness talk concerning neurology, neurosciences, biology, physics, chemistry, biochemistry, sociology, social studies, culture, history, economics, anthropology, gender, grievance studies, politics, ethics, religion, spirituality, astrophysics, the multiverse, fine tuning and the origins of the universe, evolution of life and species, etc, etc. -/- The next step for this type of doing ‘philosophy’ usually consists of some form of speculation and dealing speculatively with ideas. The latter is not original thinking but a sort of scholarly approach.. Immediately when I encounter someone using technical terms and words to talk about the ideas in philosophy and the work of other philosophers I realize that this is not original and creative thinking but scholarly work and intentions. That type of work leads to and forms part of the domains, intentions, concerns, interests, aims and objectives of other disciplines, disciplines, other than philosophy. -/- For example semantics, linguistics, signs, logic, critical thinking, mathematics, consciousness talk concerning neurology, neurosciences, biology, physics, chemistry, biochemistry, sociology, social studies, culture, history, economics, anthropology, gender, grievance studies, politics, ethics, religion, spirituality, astrophysics, the multiverse, fine tuning and the origins of the universe, evolution of life and species, etc, etc. (shrink)
In this meta-philosophical study I commence with an investigation of Wisdom. I then continue with an exploration of the institutionalization of the subject and the professionalization of those involved in it. This I contrast with original and creative philosophizing. In then sows that philosophizing resembles and attempts to do theorizing. The 9 questions, etc of the Socratic Method and details of the Philosophical Toolkit occur throughout different stages of theorizing as one level and one dimension of it. Linked books are (...) FREE for download. -/- 1 Seeking, development and realization of wisdom 4 2 Institutionalization, Professionalization of ‘philosophy’ 5 3 Original and Creative Thinking Philosophizing 37 4 Philosophizing resembles Theorizing 38 (i) Socratic Method 41 (ii) Philosophical Toolkit 145 -/- . (shrink)
Explorations of different philosophies of science, their (metaphysical, epistemological, ontological and other assumptions).These are the institutionalized empiricist approaches and the post-cognitive ones, but still anthropo-centered and (inter) subject-oriented ones. Their pre-suppositions are identified and alternatives are suggested.
ISBN-13: 978-1985686632 (CreateSpace-Assigned) ISBN-10: 1985686635 BISAC: Philosophy / Criticism A conceptual exploration of the umbrella notion Wisdom, as well as dimensions, characteristics and components of the idea of wisdom as suggested by experimental philosophy, neurosciences and other studies and a comparison of the notion of wisdom with those of knowledge, truth, insight and understanding and in different cultures and periods. Contemporary research and discussions of wisdom on a wisdom list by researchers.
In this book we approach the development of the main doctrine of Trinitarianism. It is important to remind as we do so that that doctrine must be studied by both the criteria of Christian theology and history, and that as we study the development of doctrine, we need to establish a connection between what is confessed, or dogmas, and what is believed and taught, and go back diachronically from what is confessed to what was taught and to what was believed.
What, if anything, is the correlation between the specialized or technical ideas of the philosopher and the rest of his existence? His everyday life outside his philosophical role. In the specialized reality and reality constitution, when employing the discourse and discipline of philosophy, the philosopher subscribe to many things in an explicit manner and he employs a number of implicit things and assumptions that are not stated explicitly. These things concern the different branches, areas and domains of the philosophical discourse, (...) for example metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, ontology, cognition, consciousness, mind, perception, thinking, etc. Is there a relation between these technical 'beliefs' of the philosopher and other, not philosophical areas of his existence? Does and can all of his non-philosophical existence reflect his philosophical beliefs, statements and expressions? Is it possible that the everyday existence or life world of the philosopher can resemble, confirm and express his philosophical ideas? If this is not the case, what are the factors that are involved in such discrepancies? Do they imply a lack of integrity, of wholeness of integration on behalf of the philosopher? What are the causes of such an illogical or surprising lack of compatibility or similarity between these sets of two or more facts? What are the things that we can look for in such a lack of compatibility – things such as the following? - inconsistency, difference, disparity, variance, variation, deviation, divergence, -/- disagreement, dissimilarity, dissimilitude, mismatch, lack of similarity, contrariety, contradictoriness, disaccord, discordance, incongruity, -/- lack of congruence, incompatibility, irreconcilability, conflict, opposition? -/- I illustrate the above by means of four examples. 1 Let us assume that the embodied human person consists of both voluntary and involuntary processes and activities. Do the philosophy of an individual reflect or express these activities or is it completely or partially unrelated to them? Do the voluntary processes and activities or the voluntary aspects of perception, cognition, brain processes and other activities resemble or express the philosophy of a thinker? 2 Some thinkers are seriously concerned about the importance of discourse and dialogue and the equality of all those involved. We find their concern about the ideal discourse and dialogue described in their written work and talks, but to what an extend do their own discursive and dialogical actions and behaviour reflect the ideal situation they preach? 3 Ethics and morality can be find in and are emphasized in all sorts of disciplines, of course they are major subjects in providing ways to live off for philosophers and we even find institutions devoted to their teaching and investigation. Do the lives, the lived morality and ethics of those individuals who preach the ideals of ethics or ethical ideals reflect the ideals they preach and that provides them with ways to earn a living? Or, is it the case that morality and ethics are merely faked by those individuals living off their preaching of ethics? And, that they merely employ the values, norms, customs and attitudes of a culture, sub-culture, community, group or another social grouping? In other words are the preachers of ethics really more ethical than the rest of the community and society? 4 When the philosopher expresses his ideas by means of all sorts of philosophical tools he is aware of the fact that he employs them, or at least aware of some of them being intentionally employed by him while he is unaware of others that he employs. Do the tools the philosopher employs to theorize (identify problems, the nature of the questions he asks, the nature of his ways of questioning, the assumptions he makes, the forming and testing of hypotheses, the making of generalizations, etc) or philosophize (perceive things, think, think about things, reason, argumentation etc) resemble what he beliefs, asserts and says about thinking, perception, cognition, understanding, subjects, objects, relationships between subjects and objects and other features and processes of epistemology? In short – does the lived philosophy, ontology, epistemology, ethics etc of the philosopher resemble, represent, confirm, substantiate, back, endorse, support, authenticate and corroborate the ideas, assertions and speculations that are expressed by the statements his philosophy or philosophizing consist of? Does he walk the walk of his talk? Are they similar and identical, the same things and merely expressions of the same things in different mediums? (shrink)
Both immanent and non-immanent (transcendent) factors related to philosophy, its nature, subject-matter, aims, objectives and methods are discussed from a meta-philosophical perspective, It will be noticed that original- and creative-thinkers in the socio-cultural practice of philosophy present us with their own, new and original ideas and patterns, sets or models of such ideas. Paradigms or models that are arrived at through the processes of theorizing. Processes that consist of a number of smaller steps or stages, stages that are multi-dimensional and (...) many-levelled. -/- All kinds of techniques and practices are employed in the contexts on these levels and in these dimensions. Some of these will be philosophical tools. These tools contribute to the doing of philosophy. This process of philosophizing forms one aspect, dimension or feature of the process/es of theorizing. -/- Some of the features will resemble and employ familiar, already existing and institutionalized ideas, models, tools, practices and techniques - usually from the discourse of philosophy, but also from other socio-cultural practices. -/- In the case of original/creative-thinkers these things will be ‘intuitive’ or ‘devised’ by the the individual himself while in the case of lesser original- and creative-thinkers these things (ideas, insights, tools, techniques, the ways they are arrived at or being constituted, employed to devise or express sets of new ideas or insights or models) will be obtained from the ideas, insights, statements, hypotheses and theories of other thinkers. The latter employs insights and ideas of others as ‘facts or factual ideas’ as ‘truths’ so as to argue for, establish, validate and legitimize their own derivative ideas resembling a kind of empirical research and the presentation of data in lectures and conferences and it is far removed from the approach of original thinkers. -/- . (shrink)
Philosophizing is part of the Process/es of Theorizing -/- An illustration (by means of a number of articles, books, opinions, statements, hypotheses, theories, arguments, reasoning and comments) of doing philosophy or philosophizing and its methods, as aspects of the contexts, stages, steps and features of the process/es of theorizing. A number of implicit assumptions and tacit pre-suppositions of this socio-cultural practice and discourse, for example as they resemble that of everyday and religious perception (MNC, “maturationally natural” perception, cognition, and action), (...) are identified and revealed. (shrink)
These words are about philosophy, the doing of philosophy and what philosophers do and what they think they do, so it is in fact meta-philosophical descriptions. They are intended as general statements about these things, generalizations, hypotheses, a model and pointers to a possible framework for a theory about what the doing of philosophy is like, what the process/es of philosophizing are like and what the processes of theorizing are like. The philosophical ‘methods’ that are referred to and described are (...) in fact resembling different aspects and features, and different stages of the process of theorizing, for example identifying and describing the data that are collected as subject-matter to be investigated, deconstructed, analysed, dealt with phenomenologically, logically or by means of the tools of critical theory, the creation of problem statements involving this data, issues or problems,, the development and weighing of alternative conjectures concerning these things, the use of disciplined imagination, the selection, interpretation and retention of such conjectures, guiding ideas and concepts, meaning construction by means of variations of different sets of concepts, invention of concepts, use of simulations or imaginary experiments, imaginative representations eg by using metaphors in accordance with the eight optimality principles, applying selection criteria relevant to the particular stage of philosophizing, and other uses of thought trials, etc. (shrink)
An exploration of the philosophical and mystical ideas of Plotinus. So as to show that underneath all traditional Western philosophy of being their lies a non-philosophy of 'the one'. The One with whom mystics seek unification or to be united with (also know as realization of the one real self, unity with the Sufi Beloved, buddha-mind, the absolute truth, the foundation or ground of all etc).
A conceptual exploration of the umbrella notion Wisdom, as well as dimensions, characteristics and components of the idea of wisdom as suggested by experimental philosophy, neurosciences and other studies and a comparison of the notion of wisdom with those of knowledge, truth, insight and understanding. https://www.academia.edu/34339690/PHILOSOPHY_PHILO_SOPHOS_LOVE_OF_WISDOM.
-/- I already wrote about derivative, academic or secondary philosophy - teaching, talking and writing about and studying the work of philosophers. -/- I compared this to original and creative thinking, thinkers, that are situated on the opposite pole of the continuum. -/- I also wrote a lot about the nature of the work of the latter, namely creative thinking. -/- for example, pre-conceptual or non-verbal ‘thinking or consciousness’, or intuition. -/- This could be viewed as the first stage of (...) creation or the combinatorial nature of creativity as Einstein and others called it. -/- I suggested that contemplation, meditation and religious mysticism and visual art informs us about and illustrates this first stage very well. -/- This combinatorial nature is one way, approach or attitude that we could be alive, interact with and respond to the world. They form the building blocks of this creative response and existence. -/- They consist of ‘impressions’ (a concept that need to be explored), by experiences (also to be explored), memories (personal or individual, collective, social, cultural and historical, of our species, human existence, planet earth, our solar system, galaxy and the multiverse) and ‘influences’ (another multi-dimensional, many-levelled, extremely complex notion). -/- These things assist us to act, be alive and live into or as consciousness and thinking and think, be conscious into and as action and existence. -/- Einstein, and others, suggested that the combinatorial nature consists of several, for example four, stages. -/- Institutionalized, derivative, academic philosophy deals only with the verbalized, conceptualized stage by means of its -isms, ideologies and methods (Marxism, analysis, pragmatism, etc). -/- In chapter 3 I show ways of multi-sensory dealing with all stages of creativity as philosophical possibilities, requiring new approaches and paradigms. -/- I explore, identify and express both sides of the limits of philosophy and the doing of philosophy. i show, reveal and make visible the ineffable and invisible. -/- . (shrink)
I intended to deal with the different sections or chapters in one volume, but as certain sections or chapters are very long, like chapter 1, THEORIZING AND PHILOSOPHIZING (VOLUME 1), I divided some of them into separate volumes, chapter 2 HEURISTICS AND PROBLEMSOLVING (Volume 2) and chapter 3 IMAGINARY EXPERIMENTS AND METAPHORS (Vol 3). -/- In Volume 1 THEORIZING AND PHILOSOPHIZING (VOLUME 1) I show that and how (the different features, steps and stages of) philosophizing resemble the processes of theorizing. (...) -/- I deal with a number of basic approaches that philosophers employ to do philosophy. These approaches form part of the traditional methodologies of all Philosophy. -/- The processes and techniques of doing philosophy resemble the techniques and methods one finds in different steps, stages and features of the processes of theorizing, theory development and construction. As many philosophers lack meta-cognitive awareness of what they are doing (namely theorizing) and how they are doing it (the techniques of the different steps and stages of theorizing) they do not complete the entire process of theorizing and theory development, but instead concentrate on only certain features of it. -/- The different features, steps and stages of theorizing are explained and the doing of philosophy is compared with them. (shrink)
LOGIC & ARGUMENTATION (VOLUME 5) The first section deals with different ways, approaches or methods of the doing of philosophy or the methodology of philosophizing or the discourse and socio-cultural practice of the Western tradition of philosophy. -/- I then insert a number of articles and post concerning the fact that Philosophy in the Western World concentrates on the History of the Western Tradition of philosophical ideas, complaints that it is white, male and Euro-centered and that it has become too (...) academic, professional and institutionalized. -/- The subsequent sections deal with the topics of Logic and a number of notions related to ‘logic’. The logic referred to are those that are relevant to philosophy or the doing of philosophizing. Truth, meaning, arguments and argumentation are then dealt with. This leads to another section on logic and finally reasoning is mentioned as the coming together of most of the previous sections. -/- If you wish to think and write about multi-dimensional things like the ‘world’, embodied persons, consciousness, human thinking etc, you should at least think multi-dimensional and many levelled. Attempting to investigate, reflect on and describe the nature and functioning of these multi-dimensional, many-levelled entities in a one-dimensional, verbal, linear manner surely is irrational and do not make sense? Visual Argument Mapping is one of these multi-dimensional, many-levelled tools. (See Appendix). (shrink)