Philosophical Speculations

AshvinP wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 3:58 pm No one is being pushed or punished here, unlike when you privately whined to BK and suggested that he ban us from the forum. Or when you suggested to Dana that people be subjected to a comment limit. These are forceful tactics that seek to repress free speech and thinking. Some people are more comfortable when their freedom and the freedom of others is curtailed, because that freedom comes with more responsibilities, and therefore anything that goes in the opposite direction toward more freedom is instinctively avoided. The ego can instinctively sense when it's egoistic life is being threatened and so it fights or flees. That's the real reason for various people either throwing false accusations of 'cult', 'tyranny', etc. or exiting the forum. Again, it doesn't matter - the rest of us will continue seeking the Truth and doing the inner work, regardless.

yeah, anyone who were around various "spiritual" cults know very well that blaming any criticism on the ego of the people who dare to express criticism is their most common tactics.

AshvinP wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 3:58 pm No one is being pushed or punished here, unlike when you privately whined to BK and suggested that he ban us from the forum.

That's just not true, I never suggested that. I only made him know that the forum's main content no longer has anything to do with his philosophy and it is hijacked by the group of Anthroposophist. He was not aware of it because he himself never visited the forum. It would be unfair to expect Bernardo to own and connect to his website a forum that represents a POV contradicting his philosophy. As a result of our correspondence he removed the link to the forum from his website. It has never been suggested by anyone to ban you guys from the forum. But the fact that you intentionally misrepresented the events is actually quite telling.

Stranger wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 4:28 pm

AshvinP wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 3:58 pm No one is being pushed or punished here, unlike when you privately whined to BK and suggested that he ban us from the forum.

That's just not true, I never suggested that. I only made him know that the forum's main content no longer has anything to do with his philosophy and it is hijacked by the group of Anthroposophist. He was not aware of it because he himself never visited the forum. It would be unfair to expect Bernardo to own and connect to his website a forum that represents a POV contradicting his philosophy. As a result of our correspondence he removed the link to the forum from his website. It has never been suggested by anyone to ban you guys from the forum. But the fact that you intentionally misrepresented the events is actually quite telling.

I think Dana summed up the situation quite nicely for us when it happened. You may not have suggested he ban us (I cant know bc I havent seen the email) but you were "utterly misleading" and obviously wanted BK to take some punative action against people who were simply expressing new ideas (new to you). That is quite tyrannical and cultish behavior.

https://twitter.com/BernardoKastrup/sta ... 4529022985
Yes ... Eugene actually took it upon himself to message Bernardo with a rant about a cult of Anthroposophy, headed by members of the official Society by that name, prompting BK to email me to get my take in the situation. I've since replied to BK and made clear that I suggest he disregard the rant as being utterly misleading. However, I agreed that for other reasons it is best that he remove the active link from his blog, so as to not give the impression that the forum is a place that new members are likely to be able to engage with him, or that it is a place predominantly focused specifically on his ideas, as opposed to also finding critiques of his ideas. Suffice to say, that anyone who is truly bothered by the way the forum has evolved since BK first conceived it almost 10 years ago, or the way that it is being moderated, then they are free to not participate, or start another forum, as one member did on Reddit.

For the record, here is my response to Bernardo ...

Hi Bernardo ... Suffice to say that this is a complete over-reaction from Eugene. I've had no communication from Simon expressing anything close to Eugene's sentiment. In a recent thread, I've actually had to take the action of deleting some insultingly provocative comments by Eugene, accusing some members of cult-like behaviour, which are completely unfounded, and out of line with the house rules. I'm now considering pre-moderation of his comments as the next step.

As for you being associated with Steiner's take on idealism, as it is expressed in his work Philosophy of Freedom, which is the source of ideas most referenced in the forum by Ashvin and Cleric, I see no reason for concern. Indeed, Daniel Pinchbeck has also made this connection to your ideas in his recent endorsement of your work, which you have shared via social media. In any case, there is actually very little discussion of the occultism that Steiner is also associated with, and there are active threads going on that are focused on other topics, some being related to your ideas, and others going well beyond your ideas into the profound implications of idealism which you tend to be disinclined to speculate about.

That said, I do feel that the active link to the forum from your blog and twitter feed does give the impression that new members might be able to engage with you in discussion there, to clarify and elaborate on your ideas. To that effect, I've posted a recent pinned message (which you can read if so inclined), to make clear why this is unlikely to be the case, given your time constraints, and that your affiliation with the forum is pretty much now in name only. So if you feel it best to remove that active link for that reason, then I have no problem with that. However, if it's for reasons you've mentioned above, then I feel you've been misinformed and misled in that regard.

I trust this alleviates your concerns about the way the new version of the forum has evolved since you first conceived of it almost 10 years ago. But hey, what should we expect under idealism, other than the evolution of ideas

lorenzop wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 2:13 pm When multiple persons suggest a manner of communication is toxic - perhaps take your own advice and "It’s best to try to introspect first, and try to sense what your soul feels like, then put it in some words, it doesn't matter if it feels approximate and arbitrary. It will be your experience, that is a great starting point."

This forum is exceedingly one-pointed (cultish) with a particular POV, and no other POV's are tolerated. I keep forgetting this - and keep making the same mistake of returning. This is on me . . . I now sense I have achieved escape velocity . . .

Stranger wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 3:06 pm That is exactly what it is. And moreover, if we look at the facts of the history of this forum, originally it was a vibrant philosophical community with hundreds of members where different views were discussed in the spirit of openness and tolerance (usually ...). Then at some point the forum was hijacked by Steiner's followers and converted into Anthroposophy forum by force by beating to death everyone who would not subscribe to their philosophy. Instead of creating their own platform and forum and inviting there people who would be interested in their POV, they hijacked the existing forum and pushed away everyone who would not subscribe to their POV. As a result of this, there is now about four active members and two or three occasional guests. Disclaimer: this is not to criticize the Steiner's philosophy, it's just a comment on the facts of the behavior of his followers.

Things are fairly simple.

I'll use an analogy. Imagine a carpentry forum. But a peculiar one. It is called "Carpentry Speculations". A vibrant community of people share their visions of what wood is, what kind of trees there are, how they can be shaped, and so on. Shockingly, none of these people work with wood. They simply love speculating about it. Some go a little further and spend some time smelling wood. They fill themselves with the smell of fresh wood and dissolve in the sensation. These people sometimes tell others "Well, there's nothing wrong with your endless abstract speculations about carpentry, but you should also take time for experiencing, for tasting reality - you have to merge with the smell of wood.

These were the happy years. If someone says "The cambium layer is at the periphery" and another says "The cambium is in the center", this is seen as a great way to share and tolerate different views. All views are equally true. They are only speculations after all. These people haven't even touched real wood.

Then some people begin to speak more concretely. They suggest actual gestures of the will, actual interactions, observations, experiments, and so on. They indicate that based on these deeper investigations, it can be confirmed that the cambium layer is indeed on the outside. Strangely (or not so much) this makes other people furious. How could one speak with such certainty about things that are after all meant to be only speculations? The smell of wood is at the limit of acceptance, but more than that - to claim that these things are real and can be experienced - is blasphemous.

This comedic metaphor pretty much sums it up. The people who left the forum simply didn't like that they heard talking about carpentry as a reality that can be explored. And to say that this expansion of existence within the depths is the actual calling of humanity and our evolutionary destiny, simply crosses all lines of decency.

You don't have to take my word for it. It can be clearly seen that without exception those who lost interest in the forum, were those who never had an interest in spiritual reality to begin with (and where can we find that spiritual reality if not within our own inner field of experience, in the ebb and flow of feelings, will and cognitive processes?). Most of them had an interest at most in the 'smell' of spiritual reality - a diffused feeling of 'there's something more to existence' that in itself doesn't lead to any positive understanding of reality but on the contrary - acts as a powerful wildcard that can only propel the speculations to even greater degrees (while conveniently keeping true reality 'on the other side').

So people who dislike the direction of the conversations here can at least try to know their true enemy. It's not called SS or Steiner. It's the reality of carpentry that they hate and would rather perpetuate indefinitely the endless speculations (with odors at most).

If people would like to have another part of the forum that is strictly about speculations (and at most smell), without any points of contact with reality, we can create that. I promise that I won't write there and point out the logical inconsistencies when someone says that the cambium is in the center.

Cleric - Your lumber metaphor and use is the exact definition of 'cultish' - odd that you can't see it. You're suggesting that you (and Ashwin) see and speak of wood in the only correct and reasonable manner.
A more useful metaphor would be that you and Ashwin see wood as a Sentient Being, and the Saw is the Soul as living thinking cutting through World Content . . . and anyone who does not see it this way is wasting everyone's time.

lorenzop wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 5:30 pm Cleric - Your lumber metaphor and use is the exact definition of 'cultish' - odd that you can't see it. You're suggesting that you (and Ashwin) see and speak of wood in the only correct and reasonable manner.
A more useful metaphor would be that you and Ashwin see wood as a Sentient Being, and the Saw is the Soul as living thinking cutting through World Content . . . and anyone who does not see it this way is wasting everyone's time.

This is definitely my last comment to you on this topic, Lorenzo, but read again:

If people would like to have another part of the forum that is strictly about speculations (and at most smell), without any points of contact with reality, we can create that. I promise that I won't write there and point out the logical inconsistencies when someone says that the cambium is in the center.

You keep interacting with us, misrepresenting our position (as you did again above), and won't accept any of our offers to help you understand it better... fine, create another section on this forum, recruit Eugene and whomever else fled the forum (many of whom followed the leader at Eugene's prompting to BK, which he is now blaming on us ), and start discussing amongst yourselves the nature and smell of wood. We won't interfere to point out any deeper aspects that can be reached.

Now let's be honest, you and Eugene would have banned Cleric, Federica, and myself a long time ago if you were moderators, yet we are offering you guys your own private section on the forum where you can discuss "in the spirit of openness and tolerance" to your heart's content. It doesn't get more accommodating than that. How about it?? (I feel like I am trying to convince the kids to finally move out of the house )

Cleric K wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 5:06 pm If people would like to have another part of the forum that is strictly about speculations (and at most smell), without any points of contact with reality, we can create that. I promise that I won't write there and point out the logical inconsistencies when someone says that the cambium is in the center.

Unfortunately it's too late, I don't believe anyone would return.

But the point it - this forum was created as an open platform for philosophical speculations. Anyone who is/was interested in specific practical ways to explore the reality deeper than just philosophical speculation (and there is a large variety of such ways including different religions and spiritual practices) should have gone to the places where the practitioners of such specific ways socialize (be it online or in real life). Every religion and spiritual practice have their own platforms on the internet, including Anthroposophy. But you guys have committed a theft in the virtual space - you hijacked the existing forum, changed its subject and content and pushed away anyone who would not subscribe to it by cultivating heavy criticism and intolerance to alternative views, including personal attacks (see Ashvin's above posts as an example). You had high hopes that among hundreds of members you would find many who would subscribe to your paradigm, but apparently that did not happen. Ironically, this happened not because of any flaws of Steiners philosophy and spiritual teachings, but mostly because of the said forceful behavior and tactics of the group of his followers on this forum. Philosophers are usually intelligent and open-minded people who are not so easy to manipulate and convert into cult followers.

I have a lot of respect to Steiner and his teachings, even though I do not fully subscribe to them. But my feeling is that if he would know what some people do in his name, he would be deeply concerned and ashamed.

Stranger wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 5:45 pm I have a lot of respect to Steiner and his teachings, even though I do not fully subscribe to them. But my feeling is that if he would know what some people do in his name, he would be deeply concerned and ashamed.

I'm sorry, but this is just a lie. A few years ago you wrote:

Most spiritual traditions are paths for consciousness to grow into the Divine, but some paths go off the rails.

If my fellow engineer tells me that he designed a device for spiritual science to communicate with Archangel Michael, I will not bother figuring out how his device works but will recommend him to talk to a psychiatrist.

Then you posted a picture of Steiner and suggested we could tell his unspiritual ways just from looking at his eyes. More recently you tried to argue the higher communications were inspired by the false light, the Demiurge who wishes to trap souls on Earth. You have zero respect for spiritual science, Eugene. And it's amazing to me you keep lying about that when the evidence that reveals it's a lie is plastered all over the forum. Please, just stop.

AshvinP wrote:Then you posted a picture of Steiner and suggested we could tell his unspiritual ways just from looking at his eyes. More recently you tried to argue the higher communications were inspired by the false light, the Demiurge who wishes to trap souls on Earth. You have zero respect for spiritual science, Eugene. And it's amazing to me you keep lying about that when the evidence that reveals it's a lie is plastered all over the forum. Please, just stop.

Hey, most of human endeavors and practices (including spiritual) are in some ways distorted and inspired by the Demiurge, and yet in some other ways contain glimpses of higher truths and are inspired by higher-order beings. It's a mixed bag, and this is how the souls learn. That also applies to Steiner's teachings. To be honest, my attitude towards Steiner and his teachings did change over time from mere rejection to partial acceptance. That's because I'm also an evolving being

AshvinP wrote: we are offering you guys your own private section on the forum where you can discuss "in the spirit of openness and tolerance" to your heart's content. It doesn't get more accommodating than that. How about it?? (I feel like I am trying to convince the kids to finally move out of the house )

you must be kidding

Stranger wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 6:07 pm To be honest, my attitude towards Steiner and his teachings did change over time from mere rejection to partial acceptance. That's because I'm also an evolving being

How can you accept something you still don't understand in the least? Someone who was partially interested in spiritual science would not return to this forum only to occasionally post about Demiurges, non-dual awakenings, and abstract metaphysical theories. Not a single time have you asked questions like Anthony or Guney, or tried to figure out what higher cognition is all about or where to seek it (and it's perfectly clear you haven't already found it, as your nondual philosophy cannot elucidate anything about how the higher curvatures relate to normal Earthly experience).

Anyway, enough distraction, I will end this discussion with you by quoting Cleric from around the same time 3 years ago. It's interesting how your POV on these things is so much the same that one can respond to your comments by simply quoting comments from years prior

I think I'm done here, Eugene. It's clear that you simply don't have interest in such penetration into the inner being. You have stated your reasons and I'm OK with that. I can compare this with a ball that is slightly deflated - it has a dimple. No matter how hard we try to straighten it out it simply appears somewhere else. It's the same in our discussion. I've described in great detail everything needed to understand the nature of higher cognition but I can't provide from myself to someone else the good will to at least understand these things. This missing good will is the dimple.