10 ms·
Can Transcendence Be Taught?
- M_Grey 10y agoThere are a lot of assumptions worked into that, with one of the biggest being, "Who needs transcendence? We suspect humans do."
- pmoriarty 10y agoHow is that an assumption? It sound to me more like an expression of a conclusion the authors come to, based on the other things the article talks about up to that point (ie. all the evidence they present that humans crave existential meaning).
- M_Grey 10y agoYou're just shifting the assumption from what I said, to something like, 'transcendence provides humans with the existential meaning they crave.'
- jasonkostempski 10y agoI was thinking more like is transcendence even an actual thing? The Google definition is "existence or experience beyond the normal or physical level." Which in turn needs a definition for "normal" and "physical". Beyond "normal" I can maybe buy into, but beyond "physical", I'm doubting anyone has a convincing example of.
- M_Grey 10y agoAbsolutely, and that goes some way to undermining the notion of its requirement in the lives of humans.
- catawbasam 10y agoI had an experience which I found, and still find, utterly convincing. But if I tried to describe it to you, you probably wouldn't be at all swayed. William James writes about this in 'The Varieties of Religious Experience'.
- M_Grey 10y agoThe same could have been said for Einstein, but the trick was that he could prove it math, and observations. If what you found was real, do you think it could ever find some real expression that's testable? If not, maybe it only felt real, which would make sense if it happened entirely within the realm of your own senses.
- orasis 10y agoWhat if your assumption that things happen outside "the realm of your own senses" is false? The color blue does not exist outside the realm of our senses. Neither does the concept of a "table".
- M_Grey 10y agoAnd yet you could establish criteria for both. Blue is defined by specific wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation, and a table is an object. Both provide testable predictions, "Light of this wavelength will appear 'blue', and I can bang my shin against this table..." People who have never met can report having the same experiences with both "Blue" and "Table".
- orasis 10y agoIt's no different with private subjective experience - it's just that most people lack precise language to describe "transcendent" experiences. For example, there are mind states called "jhana" that can be reliably accessed by experienced meditators. The language used to describe them is along the lines of "as piti subsides and suka becomes more prevalent, you are entering the 2nd jhana". We even have language to describe what it's like to experience without an experiencer: In the seeing, only the seen. In the thinking, only the thought...
- M_Grey 10y agoNone of what you're saying addresses any of what I said, you've just sidestepped it with claims of inexpressibility as well as untestability.
- Jarwain 10y agoWould you say a purely mental experience is beyond physical, since there is no physical manifestation of the phenomena or experience, it only exists in a person's mind?
- ktRolster 10y agoI was thinking more like is transcendence even an actual thing? Transcendentalism is a philosophy espoused by Emerson. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendentalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendentalism This article is basically just trying to hilight some good points of that philosophy.
- pmoriarty 10y agoI think the essay is misnamed. It should have been "Why Should Transcendentalism Be Taught?" or "Is 19th Century Transcendentalism Relevant to us in the 21th Century?" For more on what Transcendentalism is, see: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/transcendentalism/ http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/transcendentalism/ (with the caveat that the Internet is a pretty poor place to learn philosophy)
- orasis 10y agoI experience reality as This present consciousness. I used to experience a "normal", "physical" reality and now my experience is beyond that. If you are curious how such perspectives may evolve, you might find this interesting: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2007/03/thusnesss-six-stages-of-experience.html?m=1 http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2007/03/thusnesss-six...
- drewmassey 10y agoAs possibly the only musicologist on this site, mad props for the chronicle.com link. Also, dying is pretty inconvenient, isn't it?
- devereaux 10y agoTLDR: You must live in the present, launch yourself on every wave, find your eternity in each moment -- Thoreau
- pmoriarty 10y agoI don't think that's a fair summary. It's like summarizing The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy as "42". This article touches on so many points and looks at so many approaches to the issues it raises that it just can't be adequately summarized in a single sentence or even a paragraph. Some points that it touches on: - Why are we here? - Is there any meaning to life, death or suffering? - Can science, academia, philosophy, or theology offer satisfying answers to these questions? - "Are we teaching students everything without teaching them anything regarding the big questions that matter most?" and many others. It's a deep article, worthy of careful reading and consideration.
- Retra 10y agoYou'd find the same things with careful reading and consideration for a shallow article too.
- analog31 10y agoI ask this sincerely: Why do we think that these are important questions, other than that they have been asked over and over, by people who have a vested interest in perpetuating them? Maybe there's no why, no meaning.
- taneq 10y agoI find it interesting how they conflate "finding comfort" with "finding truth." In my experience, in the existential sense, the latter is the antithesis of the former.
- mcguire 10y agoOne reply: The truth is the truth. If you don't find it comfortable, you are the one who needs to change.
- Koshkin 10y agoTruth is almost never comfortable. And, generally, ignorance is bliss (which is true, however uncomfortable that may be).
- duaneb 10y agoThis is a very strange attitude about truth. What does it have to do with one's comfort level? Not everyone is emotionally invested in understanding the universe. I personally rather enjoy it when the universe surprises me, although again, surprises can be good or bad.
- Koshkin 10y agoAccording to Hitchhiker's Guide, a truth about the universe is that the universe is an extremely big place - so huge, in fact, that our planet and all of us look utterly insignificant in the grand scheme of things. Which, I think, is true, but there is no way I could take comfort in that thought.
- duaneb 10y agoI think the reverse—that humans are somehow meaningful—is far more terrifying.
- notduncansmith 10y ago
- javajosh 10y agoMy uncle passed away 2 years ago, and he was an erudite man, having read (and memorized) countless books. He never used any of his vast knowledge in his work, and his (nuclear) family "put up" with his penchant for reading and accumulating a vast library. He did not, to my knowledge, discuss science, philosophy, or religion with his wife or kids, all of whom are eminently practical people, dutifully hustling real-estate agents who don't read for pleasure. We spoke at length while he was in the hospital, many times. He faced his death with serenity. His primary concern was for his wife's well-being, who he knew would miss him terribly. All of his knowledge died with him, which I found troubling, but he did not.
- naner 10y agoHis knowledge didn't die with him... it's still in all those books.
- solipsism 10y agoI find the fact that you were troubled troubling. Sounds like your uncle read for fun. Sounds like he did it a lot. This is good. Lots of people suffer their entire lives. But you're troubled you couldn't squeeze the concentrated knowledge out of him like an orange? You'll have to read all the books yourself i guess.
- javajosh 10y agoI'm not sure why I can't flag this post, but if I could I would.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- Animats 10y agoWhy we are here? It's an accident of evolution. Why we live only to suffer and die? Because otherwise old animals would consume resources needed for growth, and thus there's evolutionary pressure for limited lifespans. It's not that those are hard questions. It's that people don't like the answers. Deal with it.
- hueving 10y agoLimited lifespans have nothing to do with resource constraints. There is just nothing to select for longer lifespans beyond the time it takes to reproduce.
- jomamaxx 10y ago"There is just nothing to select for longer lifespans beyond the time it takes to reproduce." Definitely there is. If humans spent a long time learning, and were more productive and fruitful in their later years, developing more intelligent systems, they would theoretically out-compete a civilization that wasn't able to develop such advanced skills and learning - especially related to passing on information. The missing issue not obvious in genes is the amount of cultural information and learning passed on. A genetically 'superior' race of beings (faster, smarter, more disease resistant) would surely be 'beaten' by a group of lesser beings who were able to cooperate, learn, cognize, master tools, pass on wisdom etc...
- rubberstamp 10y agoThis is the same conclusion I came to as well thinking about stuff. There are a lot of genes that we don't know what it does. Unless evolutionary feature development is throwing stuff at the wall and seeing what sticks, there definitely is information (not just physical description of how features should be and how it should function, but many valuable data as well) passing from parents to siblings via genes. I came across two some orphaned puppies. They grew up and knew how to do certain stuff and I didn't see anyone teaching them those stuff.
- cousin_it 10y ago
- Myrth 10y agoIf you're interested in the topic, highly recommend Peter Watts' "False blindness" and "Echopraxia"