Dr. Rich Grego, Can Academia Handle the Evil Question? |445|

#21
Not to defend Alex (a guy who sometimes just seems to be asking for it) he does NOT there complain most about good/evil, he complains about the lack of certainty regarding the extended consciousness - that nature of life. Why doesn't that author recognize first this, then with regard to the connected nature, explain why he wouldn't "feel" the pain ("feel" here means, make some expression with regard to the pain effected).
The undesirable nature of cults are that each finds some "un-natural" practices which are not expressed "up front" to new comers and certainly are denied or kept secret in some fashion.

I think Alex just wants academia to feel the pain that they seem to disassociate themselves from when "exploring" religions in published form.

The issue Alex does not want to acknowledge though (pardon my assuming to know), is that academia HAS to write about what is in the circle as within the circle. Not its relationship to issues or groups outside the circle. Not how it affects or opinion-ates outside the circle. Alex is outside the circle - not in the cult. He wants "outside-the-circle" (extended consciousness) addressed by academia with respect to their inside-the-circle specimens.
 
#22
I disagree... that's just giving up. I don't think we have to take the game seriously but if we're going to step onto the playing field...


this is the deeper spiritual truth, eh :)
Funny. I agre, his bored-like "so what?" does sort of take the wind out of what we earnestly are here (this spiritual field) to gain certainty on.
 
#23
If academia cannot accept the concept of Consciousness as something separable and able to exist away from our material bodies and that it is composed of something non material then certainly academia will never try to tackle the influence of evil on Consciousness. They would first need to consider the possibility all Consciousness is produced from a same intelligent and reasoning Source. This would imply the existance of a Great Spirit. Of course that is a leap too far for academia to take.
 
B

Baccarat

#24
I haven't listened to the show because I have spent the past 45 years contemplating the nature of evil in various ways - and I don't find much contemporary commentary on the subject of any use to me. If I am not bored I just get pissed off.

It really doesn't matter how smart a guy is. As a theme evil is an important thing to contemplate and discuss - up to a point. Getting into the nature of evil without having a very refined notion of right and wrong is mostly just intellectualism. It doesn't get to the root of the matter. And thinking you know right from wrong at a deep level is a peril - there's always further to go.

So I am not suggesting that an academic will not do a decent study on evil, just that it won't be definitive or useful as a guide of any kind. I am not even sure that engaging in exploring the nature of evil is useful at all, beyond being an intellectual exercise. It certainly can't be a moral guide. One need only observe what is done in the name of good to see that we scarcely understand what that is.

Besides evil is all too often a brand that gets stamped on things we get exercised about. It signals the limits of our comprehension and is often a mask for our inarticulate angst. I get into an awful lot of trouble when I engage in discussions on this subject - which is why I mostly avoid it now.
Well said
 
B

Baccarat

#25
I wonder if this is what nietzsche alluded to when he said transcend good and evil. This over intellectualism of ideas concepts
 
#26
If academia cannot accept the concept of Consciousness as something separable and able to exist away from our material bodies and that it is composed of something non material then certainly academia will never try to tackle the influence of evil on Consciousness. They would first need to consider the possibility all Consciousness is produced from a same intelligent and reasoning Source. This would imply the existance of a Great Spirit. Of course that is a leap too far for academia to take.
Interesting indeed.

Academia is a group. An academic writes on a thing specific. I though what was not appreciated was that individually, the academics do not address (judge) their specific specimens.
Do I have this right?
 
B

Baccarat

#27
Good points are made what is the point of studying good and evil? We loosely have our ideas about it, what use is it to dig deeper? More importantly can you ask yourself how can I alleviate suffering? Not only for yourself but for other people even if it's 1 person. Simplicity is the answer for me, intellectualism can not solve these concepts
 
#30
Sheldrake’s telepathic dog study was exploratory at best. The dog’s owner was the co-author of the study. Hmmm..

In fairness, this is Wiseman’s analysis. Have at it:

http://www.richardwiseman.com/resources/Jaytee.pdf
A dog is not likely to form a telepathic link with a lab worker. It would be easy to do a study that would (at least probably) produce no evidence for telepathy - all you would need to do, is use experimental dogs in a research lab.

Pam Smart obviously put a lot of effort into those studies, and I think it was very generous of Rupert to add her name to the paper.

David
 
L

lonevoice

#31
Sheldrake isn't stupid / he knows how to correctly design a scientific study. The results of the experiment with dogs were impressive. To me, an animal communicator (now retired), they were not at all surprising.
 
L

lonevoice

#32
It seems strange this movie has not come up here:
The Master
One of P.T. Anderson’s best films, and one of the best films of the 2010s by anybody, is this drama starring Joaquin Phoenix, Philip Seymour Hoffman, and Amy Adams. Originally seen as a dissection of the creation of Scientology, The Master is a lot more than that, breaking down leader/follower relationships, trauma, and doubt in ways that only one of our best filmmakers could. It’s a masterpiece.
 
B

Baccarat

#33
It seems strange this movie has not come up here:
The Master
One of P.T. Anderson’s best films, and one of the best films of the 2010s by anybody, is this drama starring Joaquin Phoenix, Philip Seymour Hoffman, and Amy Adams. Originally seen as a dissection of the creation of Scientology, The Master is a lot more than that, breaking down leader/follower relationships, trauma, and doubt in ways that only one of our best filmmakers could. It’s a masterpiece.
Tried to watch it twice kept falling asleep
 
#34
It seems strange this movie has not come up here:
The Master
One of P.T. Anderson’s best films, and one of the best films of the 2010s by anybody, is this drama starring Joaquin Phoenix, Philip Seymour Hoffman, and Amy Adams. Originally seen as a dissection of the creation of Scientology, The Master is a lot more than that, breaking down leader/follower relationships, trauma, and doubt in ways that only one of our best filmmakers could. It’s a masterpiece.
Where can I find it (without having to join some membership)?
 
Top