Awakening from the Meaning Crisis - John Vervaeke

[Ninja_pig]

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLND1JCRq8Vuh3f0P5qjrSdb5eC1ZfZwWJ

This is a lecture series by a psychologist at the University of Toronto. It beautifully combines historical and contemporary philosophy as well as psychology in order to explain and offer a solution for the problem of apparent meaninglessness to life that is becoming pervasive in the western world. If you are a fan of speakers like Shinzen Young or Leo, or just generally like to hear from stage yellow type people, you will love this content! It is exactly what philosophy and science are meant to be. I personally think that some of the ideas taught in these lectures will become an integral part of western thought in the near to medium future.

[SonataAllegro]

He's very stuck in his head and it's a long series, but I gained wonderful insights. You have to take notes on it and "translate" his teachings from a Yellow frame to a Turquoise frame, applying them to your own life.

[Ninja_pig]

On 5/2/2022 at 10:13 AM, SonataAllegro said:

He's very stuck in his head and it's a long series, but I gained wonderful insights. You have to take notes on it and "translate" his teachings from a Yellow frame to a Turquoise frame, applying them to your own life.

I would probably consider myself orange/green, so this stuff makes me feel like I'm growing 

[Ninja_pig]

On 4/30/2022 at 6:19 AM, Aleister Crowleyy said:

Be careful on youtube. Philosophers these days aren't reliable. Try to hit the books, then go and experiment.

Why trust Leo then?

Also, I think philosophy is an inherently solo pursuit. You can't ever fully trust any outside resource. Direct experience is the only thing that will always tell you the truth. The purpose of reading philosophy from others is to give your mind more to work with, not to adopt doctrine. 

[Matt23]

On 4/30/2022 at 5:19 AM, Aleister Crowleyy said:

Philosophers these days aren't reliable.

Perhaps... but Johnny V. and some of the people he talks with are some of the best you're going to get.  

An issue in determining "who's better" and not is probably that it's relative and we have no absolute reference point.  So then it comes down mostly to unconscious and conscious biases and preferences which could co-opt our ability to be accurate judges of people.  Though, I do also think that we have the ability to discern whether others are coming from a "higher" place, a more accurate, and sophisticated, and good faith position than others.  Like, it's obvious to me, and I think many, that John Vervaeke is a more good faith and intelligent actor than say someone like Trump, even Ben Shapiro (perhaps not as obvious to some about Ben though).  This is where I think the "it's all relative" statement can become foolish; when it no longer makes judgement calls, discerns between higher-lower, better-worse, etc..