JohnnyRocket

Jordan Peterson

259 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

26 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Stage Green is not chaos, it's just a new, higher kind of order.

@Leo Gura How is it a higher kind of order? Is it better at establishing stability? Higher in Spiral Dynamics?

Edited by CreamCat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, CreamCat said:

@Leo Gura How is it a higher kind of order? Is it better at establishing stability? Higher in Spiral Dynamics?

Well green is more or less "born" out of resistance to orange. What puts it "above" orange (and blue) is that it is able to see the flaws of an orange mentality... for example, someone in stage orange is blind to the idea that a paradigm shift could possibly even be an option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@CreamCat Ideally Green transcends and includes Orange, Blue, etc.

Every stage is supposed to build on top of the ones before it.

Pathology occurs when a new stage emerges and tries to suppress the lower stages. Which, of course, every stage tries to do.

The key evolutionary developments of stage Green are acknowledgement of relativism, the impulse towards universal equality, and environmental consciousness. These are all good things which are necessary to soften Orange's cut-throat individualism and blind materialistic ambition. This is a much needed solution to Orange chaos.

Each stage creates it own kind of chaos which the next stage then evolves to resolve.

The solution to Blue chaos was Orange. The solution Orange chaos is Green. The solution to Green chaos is Yellow.


"Be melting snow. Wash yourself of yourself." -- Rumi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

3 hours ago, RendHeaven said:

Well green is more or less "born" out of resistance to orange. What puts it "above" orange (and blue) is that it is able to see the flaws of an orange mentality... for example, someone in stage orange is blind to the idea that a paradigm shift could possibly even be an option.

triggering in 3 . .. 2 ... 1 .. 

what if the wrong paradigm shift was starting to believe in a budha type of delusion who makes you believe everyone else/everything is a delusion.

yes they are, but who are you to believe that your illusion is better. All of you ( not all ) act like new god fanatic, true fanatic or not, you look like fanatics. ( as JP and his fan looks aswell )

 

I find it very stupid to tell that jordan peterson has nothing to offer ( people who told about "lines" and joking around, are you fucking mindless ? )even if he is a pill of shit, where is the radical open mind ? like him or hate him, doesn't make him "full of shit".

I m currently studying Hitler Philosophy, so what's wrong about ? I m Hitler and Goebels and his dog

 

what is wrong about letting everything be ? maybe because like Marc Aurèle told, human are a part of nature;

why fight nature, maybe you're all acting in face of nature, maybe it's my nature to not be allowed to believe in a "higher order" maybe that how the world is and will ever be ( or not, I m not propheting anything )

I believe in a higher order aswell without individual materialism, washed from all orange and blue value, but not for a "turquoise world", something more like a yellow society. A turquoise society even if it was a possibility, would need a serious yellow society, and that for decades ( even century )

 

maybe ..You should work on making people embody yellow and pure yellow, talking on a yellow open mind. Because turquoise value reflect probably a bit crazy in people who lack a bit of open mindedness.

 

The idea that the society is "divided" in liberal/conservatism is not that bad. I dreamed about a full society of turquoise, and it's a delusion.

I meditate the idea JP was talking about, and maybe this is true, real order comes aswell from order and chaos. 

a stupid idea model :

A world full of order ? ( conservatism ) / order

A world full of liberal ? ( open minded ) / chaos

 

the world is completely balanced has it is ? no ?

guess where would be the entire human race if we are all turquoise ? sure not masturbating on VR, but still, there would be no art. A life without art is meaningless, isn't it ? do you mean art is a drug for cure the death of god ?!

 

Turquoise would have a lot of problem as well. Just dream of you "perfect earth" and contemplate how meaningless it is to have such a dream. ( or not, I will makes no claim on how you should view the world )

 

even if we all attain turquoise, the world would never be at peace. what caused orange and blue was "nature violence". People watching their loved one die, and because of fear of nature started to become "utilitarian" . I suppose something like. This is why it's so hard to change.

You're probably a part of nature, a part of nature can't be aware of "being it".
 

so we all live in our own delusion to our system. There is no high as there is no low, everything is in "space" it's all a matter of perspective. ( everything )

 

it's leo who told in a video, the best way to makes it is believe in a higher illusion ( because the mind operate from illusion ) ( not sure, but the sentence was in my mind ) -> not sure on the video and the sentence.

" why people seams crazy " 

where is Rick from Rick & Morty in the spiral ? black yellow ?

 

 

do you think I m full of shit ?

 

Edited by Strikr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

12 hours ago, Strikr said:

where is Rick from Rick & Morty in the spiral ? black yellow ?

rick and morty is pure orange lol. Very entertaining, very well made, but nonetheless orange.

Edited by RendHeaven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, RendHeaven said:

I agree with your premise that avoiding porn can fall on any color of the spectrum, but JP certainly isn't approaching it from a turquoise perspective. He believes in MORALS and RESPONSIBILITY which are great within a certain context, but JP lets those things run his life. He's against all the rules that don't serve him, but he clings to the rules that do serve him. His new book? 12 rules for life. Lol. So much for freedom... no, he's definitely a fan of restraints but what he does is he chooses very carefully what he believes to be the RIGHT restraints. In a dualistic world, that works wonderfully handy dandy. But it doesn't serve Truth. If you're on a spiritual journey, that's a big no-no.

One thing to keep in mind is that JP *IS* a relativist. He actually acknowledges post modernism and that ultimately it's all relative. Where his ideas differ is that he believes there are infinite interpretations, but there's only a small finite set of interpretations that lead to a positive and meaningful life. 

Every spiritual system is based on rules or guidelines. While the truth is always non dual, there are guidelines on how one should conduct themselves. The Vedic traditions have guidelines, Buddhism has guidelines, Kabbalah has guidelines, etc. These guidelines tend to be conservative because that's simply all it takes to be on a straight and narrow path towards truth. They generally work. The key is, are your guidelines there to orient oneself spiritually or are they there to control societies and suppress expression like many organized religions tend to do. I don't think JP cares to control and suppress. He understands the individual process, the value of order and chaos, the necessity of different perspectives and types of people, freedom of speech, etc.

Where I agree with you and @Leo Gura is that he has a tendency to demonize and become angry when speaking about the radical left. This is unhealthy moralizing. Definitely part of his shadow. Does that mean you throw the baby out with the bath water? I wouldn't. I think he's refreshing voice for the West. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, hundreth said:

He actually acknowledges post modernism and that ultimately it's all relative. Where his ideas differ is that he believes there are infinite interpretations, but there's only a small finite set of interpretations that lead to a positive and meaningful life.

This is a clever egoic trick. There are in fact far more viable and healthy interpretations than Peterson would lead you to believe.

He makes it sound like his Christian-based solutions are the only ones that would work. Which is far from the case.

The whole point of cultural relativism is to acknowledge all the weird and diverse solutions that cultures have come up with. Peterson just glosses over this part.

One of the serious downsides of the stage Blue traditionalist worldview is that it is incapable of learning from other cultures because it holds itself as the one superior culture.

For example, why is Peterson not talking about Hinduism? Yoga? Advaita? Buddhism? Sikhism? Paganism? Jainism? Concepts from Islam? etc. Some of these cultures have far superior spiritual teachings to Christianity, which is extremely corrupt and degraded.

And, the most positive and meaningful life comes from dropping all interpretations as much as possible. You see how JP is avoiding infinity? Trying to make it finite?

It's not just that JP rails against the radical left. I would criticize the radical left too. The much bigger problem is that he paints most of the left as radical left. Which is utterly absurd. Obnoxious college feminists in their early 20's do NOT represent the mainstream left almost at all. That's like 1% of the left. The most immature version of the left. It would be like representing all conservatives as KKK.

He is making a mountain out of a molehill. As if a handful of obnoxious college feminists are about to take over the world. Please!


"Be melting snow. Wash yourself of yourself." -- Rumi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

8 hours ago, hundreth said:

he has a tendency to demonize and become angry when speaking about the radical left

In my country, the radical feminists (the radical left) talk about aborting male babies, grinding them in a blender, and eating them with sauce. Cannibalism is justisifed against men. They often threaten and bully women who don't agree with feminism. They even talked about how delicious the male baby was in their mouths. It was probably a fantasy novel, though. It felt weird to see moderate feminists consider those radical feminists as useful idiots. Those moderate feminists didn't seem too bothered with eating babies. They justified those radical feminists for the purpose of empowering women. They justified eating baby because women were oppressed and are justified to take revenge on men.

what.gif

This made me avoid feminism. It seems to me that feminist movements failed to contain psychopath infection.

I do not want to associate with them in any form.

It would be difficult for most people not to demonize and get angry at such radical leftists.

Edited by CreamCat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

14 minutes ago, CreamCat said:

This made me avoid feminism.

I do not want to associate with them in any form.

It would be difficult for most people not to demonize and get angry at such radical leftists.

Oh boy. That was so... dense. Try being lighthearted. It's much more fun. ;)

Edited by RendHeaven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

This is a clever egoic trick. There are in fact far more viable and healthy interpretations than Peterson would lead you to believe.

He makes it sound like his Christian-based solutions are the only ones that would work. Which is far from the case.

The whole point of cultural relativism is to acknowledge all the weird and diverse solutions that cultures have come up with. Peterson just glosses over this part.

One of the serious downsides of the stage Blue traditionalist worldview is that it is incapable of learning from other cultures because it holds itself as the one superior culture.

For example, why is Peterson not talking about Hinduism? Yoga? Advaita? Buddhism? Sikhism? Paganism? Jainism? Concepts from Islam? etc. Some of these cultures have far superior spiritual teachings to Christianity, which is extremely corrupt and degraded.

He does. Maps of Meaning was all about connecting and integrating myths from around the world to find common themes and narratives.

He's not saying Christian based solutions are the only ones that work. He's not even a traditionalist Christian, he doesn't go to church. He just resonates most deeply with the story of Christ. Sounds like a personal preference more than anything else.

 

 

https://archive.org/details/youtube-7XtEZvLo-Sc

 

 

Quote

And, the most positive and meaningful life comes from dropping all interpretations as much as possible. You see how JP is avoiding infinity? Trying to make it finite?

It's not just that JP rails against the radical left. I would criticize the radical left too. The much bigger problem is that he paints most of the left as radical left. Which is utterly absurd. Obnoxious college feminists in their early 20's do NOT represent the mainstream left almost at all. That's like 1% of the left. The most immature version of the left. It would be like representing all conservatives as KKK.

He is making a mountain out of a molehill. As if a handful of obnoxious college feminists are about to take over the world. Please!

Yeah I'm not arguing his approach is the ideal one, it just seems like you haven't really looked deeply into him and are basing your opinions on him via soundbites from popular interviews. He considers himself a leftist, but "radical" is always going to be relative and a moving target. What were fringe leftist ideals 20 years ago are mainstream today. He believes we've gone too far in that direction. 

I'm personally not a Christian. I grew up in a traditional Jewish household but resonate most with spiritual teachings from the East. That said, I think JP is a bridge for the West. We've gone deep into the atheist / materialist paradigm and he's bringing a different view into the mainstream via psychology, mythology and debate. Is this how an Eastern mystic would go about it? No. Does that make it worthless? No. Is JP a traditional Christian who ignores all other paths? No. 

Personally I'm with you, I would hope he can go back to speaking about philosophy, mythology, and spirituality as opposed to politics. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@hundreth I really appreciate that you went out of your way to find the sources which you were referencing. However, I do want to note that Leo is still more or less right about his assessments of JP.

JP MAY talk about eastern religions and myths, but he always finds a way to sneak his agenda into them, westernizing them without realizing it.

For example, he talks about ying and yang quite a lot. Every single time he will proclaim that "it symbolizes order and chaos!"

No. No it doesn't.

Ok, maybe you COULD interpret it that way, but the origins of Taoism don't give a shit about hard dualities like "order" and "chaos." The whole point of the symbol is to point to the fact that "all is one." It tries to convey that seemingly opposite things are one and the same. The symbol is a glaring signpost for nonduality.

JP, however, relentlessly uses it as "proof" that "even the eastern people agree with me about order and chaos!"

Man, I really used to like that guy (followed him for a solid year before he got famous) but as I've started to grow and develop myself, It's becoming more and more clear to me that JP is stuck in his own paradigm. Again, he MAY find sources from halfway across the world, but he will warp their meanings to fit the overwhelmingly western map that he wants to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, RendHeaven said:

@hundreth I really appreciate that you went out of your way to find the sources which you were referencing. However, I do want to note that Leo is still more or less right about his assessments of JP.

JP MAY talk about eastern religions and myths, but he always finds a way to sneak his agenda into them, westernizing them without realizing it.

Interesting response. I'm not really sure what's so "Western" about order / chaos. That seems like your projection. It's not like order and chaos are inherently Judeo-Christian concepts. Every spiritual system has it's own ways of representing duality. The Hindus have Purusha and Prakriti. The Buddhists have form and emptiness. Kabbalists have dark / light. The Tao has yin / yang. 

 

Quote

For example, he talks about ying and yang quite a lot. Every single time he will proclaim that "it symbolizes order and chaos!"

No. No it doesn't.

Are you sure? The Taoists describe yin and yang as positive / negative, and feminine vs. masculine. JP also relates order to masculine energy and chaos to feminine energy. This is the same relationship between Kali and Shiva in the Vedic myths where she's dancing on top of him laying down. Feminine yin energy is also associated with "mother nature" - chaos. Practically speaking, what's the difference?

When Jordan Peterson says the optimal way to live is in balance between order and chaos, what is practically different from the Buddha teaching the Middle way?

Quote

Ok, maybe you COULD interpret it that way, but the origins of Taoism don't give a shit about hard dualities like "order" and "chaos." The whole point of the symbol is to point to the fact that "all is one." It tries to convey that seemingly opposite things are one and the same. The symbol is a glaring signpost for nonduality.

JP, however, relentlessly uses it as "proof" that "even the eastern people agree with me about order and chaos!"

Man, I really used to like that guy (followed him for a solid year before he got famous) but as I've started to grow and develop myself, It's becoming more and more clear to me that JP is stuck in his own paradigm. Again, he MAY find sources from halfway across the world, but he will warp their meanings to fit the overwhelmingly western map that he wants to see.

The whole point of the symbol is more than it's "all one." That is true, though a huge part of the symbol is that opposing energies which are not the same are necessary for duality to exist, and more than that, it's necessary for them to intersect. 

The larger theme is that I'm not sure what's wrong with him taking Eastern ideas and attempting to reconcile them with Western mythologies. That's a GOOD thing! When Eastern mystics talk about Christ, they often relate him to Eastern ideas such as Krishna consciousness. That's because their audience is Eastern.  

You might not agree 100% with his interpretations of Eastern teachings. You might not agree with his conclusions at all, but there's no way you can watch those videos above of him speaking about the Buddha and conclude that is stage Blue thinking. That's why I was replying to @Leo Gura. I have no problems with not appreciating JP, but if you're going to criticize him at least know what he's teaching. It's not traditional Christian, strict rules, and repression. He's also far from stage Blue, even though his beliefs will intersect at times.

I'm sincerely interested in hearing your thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 8/13/2018 at 1:56 PM, JohnnyRocket said:

I'm reading Jordan Peterson's, "Maps of Meaning" and just watched the first lecture of his, "Biblical Series I: Introduction to the Idea of God". Which I thought was amazing.

I have also recently finished Leo's latest and very profound video on, "Similarities and Differences" and have been watching Leo's videos for 2-3 yrs now.

I honestly see many more similarities than differences in what each man is saying. Perhaps they are taking things from a slightly different perspective, but the message seems to be the same to me. 

Leo, apparently doesn't see much similarity between Peterson and himself. In fact, is quite critical of him. I have developed quite a fondness of both and find their messages quite compatible.

 Where am I going wrong?

The following discussion seems to contain some very erroneous and Ill informed characterizations of JP. "Maps of meaning" clearly debunks the preconceived notions being attributed to him, He very thoroughly acknowledges the use enthiogens  and covers a dizzying array of myths and meanings from traditions from all over the world and very deeply. I just don't see the strong blue tendencies that many of you do. 

In fact, I feel we are getting a little too idiological, using Spiral Dynamics as a tool to discredit ideas and concepts that can be quite enlightening. I hope that we can maintain the understanding that the Spiral Dynamics is a very interesting tool, but still just another construct and cannot be used to dismiss ideas and concepts of others simply based on their perceived position within the spiral

How certain is it that we all here have actually read the book?

 

 

Edited by JohnnyRocket

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hundreth said:

You might not agree 100% with his interpretations of Eastern teachings. You might not agree with his conclusions at all, but there's no way you can watch those videos above of him speaking about the Buddha and conclude that is stage Blue thinking. That's why I was replying to @Leo Gura. I have no problems with not appreciating JP, but if you're going to criticize him at least know what he's teaching. It's not traditional Christian, strict rules, and repression. He's also far from stage Blue, even though his beliefs will intersect at times.

I'm sincerely interested in hearing your thoughts.

I should clarify by the way that I used to be a hardcore JP fan (I would watch his newest uploads before Leo's :P) back in 2016. Then he blew up in fame, and he just isn't the same anymore. I can't tell if that's because he's gotten worse, or I've gotten better. I would guess both.

I actually take back what I said earlier, there's absolutely nothing wrong in saying that the ying and yang symbol represents order and chaos. In a certain sense, it does, so it's fair to point that out.

But the issue remains: He uses that particular representation of order and chaos to "solidify" his conclusion, that conclusion being something along the lines of (paraphrased) "what better thing could you do as an individual other than to carry the heaviest burden you could possibly bear and put one foot forward at a time? Life is suffering! The only way to justify the struggle of existence is to persevere through the pain and find meaning on the other end regardless of the pain! One MUST have a foot in chaos and another foot in order for such meaning to manifest itself!"

That's quite a dense solution there, honestly. I mean look at the poor man's face during interviews. He's so tense and rigid I just want to massage him lol.

Life is suffering. Yes. I agree. IF, that is... IF you are an ego. If you have identifications to cling to. If you have something to guard. From the beginning, he has an apriori axiom of "life is suffering." As a professional psychological clinician, he's probably seen the worst of the worst. And he's been through so much trauma in his own life from early childhood to raising a family (and a near terminal daughter). He's the sharpest of the sharp in terms of intellect, and he still struggles to find happiness. It's no wonder he would come to the conclusion that "life is suffering."

But he's already led astray the second he lays down a metaphysical claim as "given." Ironically, again, he even points to Buddhism as "proof" of this. He always says, "Life is suffering. That's what the Buddhists have always said!"

No, Jordan! No! Life is suffering if you choose finitude! Infinitude IS an option!

From this shaky groundwork, he builds the rest of his life's work claiming that you must carry a burden. What the fuck?

No, like really. Given that life sucks and you have no way out of it, I can see how Jordan's solution of "carrying a burden to justify the suffering" can seem useful. But what if life can straight up NOT SUCK? Suddenly, this whole idea of a burden seems really stupid. 

JP goes to great lengths to justify carrying a burden. He pulls from all the myths, all the stories, all the religions and all the cultures to find any semblance with his own personal philosophy. Though this may make him seem worldly and wise, it does not change the fact that he is fueling his own delusion.

The greatest "sin" in this case is when he comes across nondual references such as yin and yang, the proceeds to IGNORE THE NONDUAL ASPECTS OF IT, and uses it as an indicator of his "carry a burden" philosophy.

Yes, yin and yang can be interpreted as order and chaos. But the key insight here is that the order and chaos are one and the same. Does JP see/advocate that? No! JP sees order and chaos as two distinctly separate states of being that one must seek out sequentially. "Oh now I'm in chaos. Time to balance it out with order!"

NO!

The proper response would be "Oh now I'm in chaos. Wow, this is literally no different from order!"

JP is actually tragic in some sense, he's so utterly devoted to the search for Truth, but he's hopelessly tangled in the deathtrap of meaning. Meaning is absolutely amazing, but it is NOT Truth.

I hope this clarifies exactly in what ways JP falls short. Here's a rough archetypal analogy for ya if you're into it ;) Imagine that "Truth" is akin to sailing home in Homer's Odyssey, but Jordan is a sailor who ran into Circe and got turned into a pig.

I actually agree with you in that JP is not really blue. I think he's a delicious blend of orange and yellow. Orange for obvious reasons, but also yellow for his insane systematic thinking. What keeps him from being pure yellow is that he seems to have skipped stage green which is acting like a thorn in his side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 8/16/2018 at 0:47 AM, Leo Gura said:

Stage Blue fears chaos (stage Red). Which is why the subtitle of his book literally expresses his fear:

He's writing a new book right now called Beyond Mere Order.

Anyway, I think you have not watched enough Jordan Peterson to speak about his ideas and arguments in sufficient detail. Try steel-manning him for once. In fact almost every time you bring up a counter argument I will think "Jordan has already addressed this".

Edited by Outer

Hero's Journey
Spiral Dynamics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 8/17/2018 at 3:33 AM, Leo Gura said:

This is a clever egoic trick. There are in fact far more viable and healthy interpretations than Peterson would lead you to believe.

It's not a clever egoic trick. It's accurate that there's an infinite amount of interpretations but only a finite amount of valid ones.

On 8/17/2018 at 3:33 AM, Leo Gura said:

He makes it sound like his Christian-based solutions are the only ones that would work. Which is far from the case.

The whole point of cultural relativism is to acknowledge all the weird and diverse solutions that cultures have come up with. Peterson just glosses over this part.

One of the serious downsides of the stage Blue traditionalist worldview is that it is incapable of learning from other cultures because it holds itself as the one superior culture.

He's not making a Christian based solution, he is making a case for an INDIVIDUAL-based solution. Remember your old signature? Christ in his view is the archetypal divine INDIVIDUAL, who all men strive to be.

On 8/17/2018 at 3:33 AM, Leo Gura said:

He is making a mountain out of a molehill. As if a handful of obnoxious college feminists are about to take over the world. Please!

Do you actually think this is his argument? Or might this be a straw man?

Edited by Outer

Hero's Journey
Spiral Dynamics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Outer said:

He's writing a new book right now called Beyond Mere Order.

Anyway, I think you have not watched enough Jordan Peterson to speak about his ideas and arguments in sufficient detail. Try steel-manning him for once. In fact almost every time you bring up a counter argument I will think "Jordan has already addressed this".

Do you know when the book is planned to be released? Also, since I know you like JP and consume most of his contents, can you recommend anything in particular? Any book you like in particular? 


Isn't it so, yes or no? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in love with Jordan Peterson. But I understand what Leo is trying to say. 

Jordan Peterson's work is all based within illusion.

And Leo is trying to pull us out of illusion.

Jordan Peterson is like a delicious illusion. His illusions taste really good. haha And when Leo speaks about Peterson, it feels like taking candy from a baby to many people. Because many of Jordan's lectures taste really sweet.

Jordan is a Bodhisattva. He is well aware of stage turquoise but feels "responsible" haha for humanity, which delays his growth. And it also makes him annoying to people on the spiritual path, because they can see "Jordan Peterson knows what's up" but he won't cross the bridge. He is choosing to stay on the side of illusion because he believes it is most beneficial to humanity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Brittany said:

Jordan is a Bodhisattva.

A Bodhisattva is someone who has awakened.

That ain't JP.


"Be melting snow. Wash yourself of yourself." -- Rumi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can split hairs over all sorts of nuances of JP's work, but in the end, it's still thoroughly grounded in the classic dualistic Christian paradigm of meaning, morality, order, right vs wrong, good vs evil, etc.

Which is, ironically, the opposite of what Christ realized.

You are not going to realize Christ through studying myth. You will realize it through hardcore spiritual practice and deconstruction of all belief systems, morality, value, and meaning.

The paradox is, you will find Christ at the very bottom end of nihilism.

And the distinction JP draws between the individual self and collectivism is a duality which did not exist for Christ.

The individual self and the collective self are in fact one and the same.


"Be melting snow. Wash yourself of yourself." -- Rumi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now