Mind's Eye Re: Truth & I

courtesan...

On Jan 30, 7:14 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Who could afford it? :-) I read the reviews a couple of years ago and
> have scouted Amazon where it is nearly half it's original price of
> $195. Even our library has only one copy- pending- and it will reside
> in the non-circulating arena- downtown. Maybe I will browse it first.
> The comparison to Wm. Blake seems valid. I also thought of Chagall and
> another contemporary who pens stuff on paintings of dreamy women. I
> desk by a Japanese coutesan reading a scroll, come to think of it!
> Undeciphered. Anyway, Jung published "Modern Man in Search of a Soul"
> in 1933- after the "Red Book" but it's dull. In fact, Campbell seemed
> dull or overwhelming last week so I needed some illustrations and
> color myself- I switched to Larousse- "World Mythology". Campbell did
> publish books with eye-appeal in his historical atlases of myth before
> his death- I have two- one inscribed- haven't read either, however.
> Someone has to do the cooking around this joint. :-)// Great
> suggestion, Gabby!
>
> On Jan 28, 9:19 am, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi Mol&Rigs, listening to you two I've been asking myself why none of
> > you mentions Jung and his description of the collective unconscious. I
> > haven't read the Red Book yet, but maybe of of you has and could tell
> > me why this is irrelevant to what you are discussing.
>
> > On Jan 27, 2:35 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > The paramount paradox.
>
> > > On Jan 27, 8:21 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Yes- I've read a lot of Campbell and admire his efforts. In fact, I
> > > > was going to put the Oriental Mythology of his Masks of God series
> > > > aside to reread- Indian, Chinese and Japanese chapters. I wish I could
> > > > keep certain studies on top of my thinking but maybe I have read so
> > > > much there is a chute to forgetfulness or a pit of scrambled
> > > > ideas! :-) Oh, dear!
>
> > > > However, back to your comment about looking back/within. I consider
> > > > there is impossible split between the spiritual and material and yet
> > > > that is our struggle to bridge- if possible.
>
> > > > On Jan 27, 6:32 am, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Do myths disappear?  Joseph Campbell mapped common human myth around
> > > > > the word and through time to discover a mechanism something close to
> > > > > common memory - the expression of the same archetypes in real time,
> > > > > isolated incidents around the globe and at the same time.  This
> > > > > phenomena has occurred throughout human history.  This may tell us
> > > > > that it is not the looking back that is important, but as Vam says,
> > > > > looking within.
>
> > > > > On Jan 26, 5:54 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > What is original? I might argue that one is simply explicating what
> > > > > > already exists.
>
> > > > > > Each generation assumes it has a distinct character- or needs to prove
> > > > > > that it has.
>
> > > > > > Was thinking the reason myths disappear is because they were oral and
> > > > > > native languages are usually suppressed by the conquerors. One also
> > > > > > carries family myths- which interfere with deep communication.
>
> > > > > > Yes- there are terrible inequities- all the more scandalous because
> > > > > > there really is plenty to go around so the root is greed and distain
> > > > > > for others. Governments only pretend to care for all its citizens- it
> > > > > > picks and chooses.
>
> > > > > > We passed the Gilded Age- I would call this the Tinsel Age.
>
> > > > > > On Jan 25, 9:45 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > I would say, Vam, that you often jump in the water with an 'entourage'
> > > > > > > of assumptive baggage.  I probably dislike citation more than you and
> > > > > > > am not the first.  Veblen would be a good start (to use some rough
> > > > > > > citation).  These days, you can at least Google the name.  When I
> > > > > > > started it meant a trip to the library.  Anyone who has the chance to
> > > > > > > read a lot of what's available (this is still remarkably few) should
> > > > > > > discover most of what they thought their own ideas have been done
> > > > > > > before.  The idea  is no doubt to try to 'stand on the shoulders of
> > > > > > > giants' (itself a wisecrack by Newton on Hooke's dwarfish stature).
> > > > > > > The 'giants' always turn out flawed.  Moses is a war criminal in
> > > > > > > Numbers 31, the Greeks, for all their argument, never produced a
> > > > > > > decent one against slavery (the lunatic-religious John Brown being
> > > > > > > better).  Many, because they don't read enough, attribute 'relativity'
> > > > > > > to Einstein, but it has a longer and wider history.  The chattering
> > > > > > > class reinvents the square wheel all over the place.
>
> > > > > > > What if the best of our system is fascist and we have grown in such
> > > > > > > culture, or a caste system?  By what processes do we get an
> > > > > > > understanding for change from such?  Western propaganda would have us
> > > > > > > believe pouring resources into the gullets of the rich is sensible.
> > > > > > > We all live in the gutter.  Only some  of us lift our eyes to the
> > > > > > > stars.  If only I was smart enough to have been first to that! (Oscar
> > > > > > > Wilde)   A common jibe by academics is that common sense is that which
> > > > > > > allows us to believe the world is flat - yet flat-earth was an
> > > > > > > academic construction - one can actually see the curvature of the
> > > > > > > Earth.
>
> > > > > > > What we need is reliable collective memory.   Given our capacity  to
> > > > > > > pervert, citation is usually used in a highly selective manner,
> > > > > > > usually along with a core academic (religious etc.) narrative of
> > > > > > > exclusion of competing argument.  Control of what is reliable memory
> > > > > > > is, of course, just what those in power want to maintain - perhaps
> > > > > > > through principles of Home and Vanity.  I will always prefer the
> > > > > > > margins to this, remembering that to oppose tyranny can pervert  into
> > > > > > > its support.
>
> > > > > > > Deconstruction is only a beginning.  I believe its spirit concerns a
> > > > > > > defeat of madness that includes rationalist fantasy and animal
> > > > > > > consensus (which I sense as grasping, selfish individualism easy to
> > > > > > > rule).
>
> > > > > > > On Jan 25, 3:26 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > >  "Is this not an important part of the dynamic multidimensional mind
> > > > > > > > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting this view at least as
> > > > > > > > a challenge?"
>
> > > > > > > > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, ending up at it is
> > > > > > > > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here and I found his view
> > > > > > > > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant.
>
> > > > > > > > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. Where his discourse
> > > > > > > > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That is also my
> > > > > > > > compelling logic against intellectual property rights. What damned
> > > > > > > > "rights" on knowledge of any kind ? Or, why must we have to give
> > > > > > > > references, when all we wish to say is ours, with us ? If it's not
> > > > > > > > ours, for us to say, we should STFU !
>
> > > > > > > > The formal aspect of Truth or truths is onerous. There are libraries
> > > > > > > > out there where it goes dry. It is the informal one that I wish to put
> > > > > > > > across : it is mine... and for that reason should be everyone's, of
> > > > > > > > everything. And that ( informal aspect ) is... HOME. The search for
> > > > > > > > that place which is truly ours, where we can rest without fear, free
> > > > > > > > and fulfilled, which nothing in the whole universe can take away from
> > > > > > > > us. Truth is our Home.
>
> > > > > > > > This is no parable I've begun. People are spent for and on a " home "
> > > > > > > > for themselves. They build, buy, rent one for the body... house or
> > > > > > > > apartment, car or craft. But then the worst a-holes amongst us come to
> > > > > > > > believe that home they are so invested on is also the " home " to
> > > > > > > > their emotion, to their thought, their identity, and their happiness
> > > > > > > > too ! Well, it is and it definitely isn't.
>
> > > > > > > > The better ( a-hols ) take on a wife, friend, progeny or pet,
> > > > > > > > community or cause, to engage their emotion-thought-identity where,
> > > > > > > > with whom or which, one then feels at home. Of that our thought is
> > > > > > > > preoccupied... that same ' faculty ' that had been used to focus on
> > > > > > > > money to buy the home, on the value of food and worth of delicacies,
> > > > > > > > on the relevance of what is beneficial and serves our purposes and
> > > > > > > > what does not.
>
> > > > > > > > That pitch of ' acquisition,' value, worth, relevance... is also there
> > > > > > > > in our thought and eye, as in it pre-exists and is consciously or
> > > > > > > > subconsciously applied, for the home-objects of our emotion as well.
> > > > > > > > For a lifetime, we carry that pitch to manage, manipulate, decide and
> > > > > > > > deal with what is outside us to acquire the material home-object in
> > > > > > > > our aim ... a domain that, for all practical purposes, encompasses
> > > > > > > > everything. For everything, external and internal, is outside the
> > > > > > > > agency, the ego-person, we are through the pursuit after our aim.
>
> > > > > > > > What is concurrent within, inside of us - the "ego-person," is a build
> > > > > > > > up and an intensification of VANITY... which expresses as : " I
> > > > > > > > possess;" " I win;" " I will acquire;" " I am successful." It is all a
> > > > > > > > matter of process that is normal to our drive and inevitable to our
> > > > > > > > search. But, as surely as sure can be, it is
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -