I distinguish between "doing philosophy" and "having a philosophy." The former is an inquiry into the unknown, aiming for greater clarity and being surprise-ready by whatever values unfold. The latter provides someone with their "is and ought" coordinates—how to understand reality and how they ought to live in it.
I love your last words, "It’s time for me to take off the transperspectival gloves, show some philosophical muscle, and create a scene." I have been creating a scene for some time now. As I do it, fear and self doubt emerge. I do not like them, but I am learning they are the friction that keeps me aware of how clear my perspectives are. In this process I have found by observation and reflection that I have been wrong in many ways. Strangely that has been refreshing. Some part of me comes alive with a new found uncertainty and more doors to unlock and new tools for sence making. May we all grow. May we all grow up in time to keep from getting burned by the world on fire. Until we can't.
I don’t think the transperspectivalism is so much mastubatory as promiscuous. You are not by yourself at home; you are out mingling with everyone. Which is great! But at some point, with maturity, you forgo promiscuity for commitment -- hopefully knowing that the partner/value you are committing too, while surely excellent, is also still very fallible and flawed, just as all the others were, but this one so delights and inspires and motivates you that you dedicate your life to it anyway.
Growing up in Los Angeles, I can remember somebody's high school graduation quote: "Don't be so broad-minded as to become flat-headed." I was never quick-witted to know that flat-headed was the opposite of well-rounded, which is the point of being broad-minded. But I got the gist.
Listening to the radio as I did "All Things Considered" I can remember the weekend roundup on Friday afternoon when the announcer would call off a list of bands at clubs, movies opening and speakers at fora. It was insane. Nobody could possibly even know or recognize all of them - except the all-powerful radio announcer. Their other show "Morning Becomes Eclectic" had the same flavor. After years of listening I realized I still couldn't win their news quiz. It was maddening. What do these people really know?
So I came up with a term called "Eclexia". It was the addiction to news and the desire to always score high on the news quiz. And I realized it was poison to knowing anything in depth. I recognized the upscale Westside LA attitude of not knowing anything in depth but taking the latest thing very seriously. Finally I was able to rid my life of Regis Philbin.
In the end, I went through a series of poorly defined multi-year periods of particular immersions. Not because my life was incomplete, but because I wanted to expand it more. I went from being apolitical to left-progressive, to taoist, to bohemian, to family-centric, to neo-conservative, back to apolitical, to martial, to stoic. Next I want to learn about animals and plants. That will be my Pastoral Education.
Perhaps (at least what I’m sensemaking) is that what we are gearing up for will be attentive towards “Midwifing the tertium quid through collective scenemaking” or something in that direction of inquiry.
YES!!! One of my philosophy professors in undergrad argued that comparative philosophy isn’t a buffet that you pick and choose what dishes to eat… But a series of paths that you need to choose which one to walk.
You can’t walk many paths at once, he argued ... and philosophies are not meant to be digested but acted within, embodied, traveled with. .... I’m not sure I agree and YET! There’s a definite power to committing : especially when you’re co-creating a scene with others who you’re walking (home) with.
Stoked for your next post. Bravo. And an opportunity to reflect ... Our little Wisdom Workshop is thusly: Foundation of an Ethics of Care, Epicurean communities of practice of Buddhist pragmatic psychology.
On method/andragogy: (Gee, Freire and Socrates; Yalom’s group dynamics.)
While I liked that the Stoa was trying to make philosophy more important than political news and streamers shooting the shit, this was actually the big problem I had with it. Another way I would frame it is that people need to care about what's most probable, even though we are all flawed human beings with extremely limited knowledge. Our potential to survive, and have the most wisdom, wellbeing, and meaning in life, is partly tied to our probability deduction ability, both as individuals and as a collective intelligence. So it's in our best interest to try to criticize, in good faith communication, what we disagree with in other people's philosophies, and try to see how patterns of information point to what is most probable.
And if we do this really well, we mutate bad ideologies into good ones instead of potentially strengthening them by arguing for them to disappear: like if someone could figure out how to turn wokeness into a probabilistically philosophical and scientific focus into the causes of human tribalism, which is where I think it needs to go in order to focus more on the good intentions within the ideology.
I'd also add it looks like the critical theories that make up wokeness (according to James Lindsay and Hellen Pluckrose) mostly come from feminist women although they used ideas from Foucalt, Derrida, and Marx who are all obviously men. And as a generalization there are different gender brain differences. So to the degree that ideologies can be representations of scientifically-valid generalizations around gendered psychology, and wokeness is an example of this in being a feminine-leaning ideology, it's theoretically possible that women might have the most potential to do the most to change wokeness into something much wiser.
"Most people do not arrive at the philosophy they have through doing philosophy."
Let's start a Wisdom Commons and call it Transperspectival NoFap.
I can imagine the comments now:
"It's been two weeks since I've last done TPM, and I feel like I've gained philosophical super powers!"
Couldn’t agree more. At some point you need to actually take action on something.
I love your last words, "It’s time for me to take off the transperspectival gloves, show some philosophical muscle, and create a scene." I have been creating a scene for some time now. As I do it, fear and self doubt emerge. I do not like them, but I am learning they are the friction that keeps me aware of how clear my perspectives are. In this process I have found by observation and reflection that I have been wrong in many ways. Strangely that has been refreshing. Some part of me comes alive with a new found uncertainty and more doors to unlock and new tools for sence making. May we all grow. May we all grow up in time to keep from getting burned by the world on fire. Until we can't.
Whew! What a cliff hanger.
I'm going to camp out here all night to find out WHICH value we'll be embodying. This is gonna be good.
I don’t think the transperspectivalism is so much mastubatory as promiscuous. You are not by yourself at home; you are out mingling with everyone. Which is great! But at some point, with maturity, you forgo promiscuity for commitment -- hopefully knowing that the partner/value you are committing too, while surely excellent, is also still very fallible and flawed, just as all the others were, but this one so delights and inspires and motivates you that you dedicate your life to it anyway.
Growing up in Los Angeles, I can remember somebody's high school graduation quote: "Don't be so broad-minded as to become flat-headed." I was never quick-witted to know that flat-headed was the opposite of well-rounded, which is the point of being broad-minded. But I got the gist.
Listening to the radio as I did "All Things Considered" I can remember the weekend roundup on Friday afternoon when the announcer would call off a list of bands at clubs, movies opening and speakers at fora. It was insane. Nobody could possibly even know or recognize all of them - except the all-powerful radio announcer. Their other show "Morning Becomes Eclectic" had the same flavor. After years of listening I realized I still couldn't win their news quiz. It was maddening. What do these people really know?
So I came up with a term called "Eclexia". It was the addiction to news and the desire to always score high on the news quiz. And I realized it was poison to knowing anything in depth. I recognized the upscale Westside LA attitude of not knowing anything in depth but taking the latest thing very seriously. Finally I was able to rid my life of Regis Philbin.
In the end, I went through a series of poorly defined multi-year periods of particular immersions. Not because my life was incomplete, but because I wanted to expand it more. I went from being apolitical to left-progressive, to taoist, to bohemian, to family-centric, to neo-conservative, back to apolitical, to martial, to stoic. Next I want to learn about animals and plants. That will be my Pastoral Education.
The trick is to swim with purpose.
Fuck. Yes.
Perhaps (at least what I’m sensemaking) is that what we are gearing up for will be attentive towards “Midwifing the tertium quid through collective scenemaking” or something in that direction of inquiry.
Grateful to you and the Stoa for providing a platform to explore my neo-Jungian proclivities. Looking forward to what’s coming next!
YES!!! One of my philosophy professors in undergrad argued that comparative philosophy isn’t a buffet that you pick and choose what dishes to eat… But a series of paths that you need to choose which one to walk.
You can’t walk many paths at once, he argued ... and philosophies are not meant to be digested but acted within, embodied, traveled with. .... I’m not sure I agree and YET! There’s a definite power to committing : especially when you’re co-creating a scene with others who you’re walking (home) with.
Stoked for your next post. Bravo. And an opportunity to reflect ... Our little Wisdom Workshop is thusly: Foundation of an Ethics of Care, Epicurean communities of practice of Buddhist pragmatic psychology.
On method/andragogy: (Gee, Freire and Socrates; Yalom’s group dynamics.)
And I feel like I’m missing something... ironic
😊
Hot damn! Love the ending! Have been sensing it...
Very grateful for the courage promised here. And for all that you’ve done to get here. #keepgoing
🐱👤✨
I don't think wisdom is a value. It's more like an event, always in a flesh and blood context. Like love.
While I liked that the Stoa was trying to make philosophy more important than political news and streamers shooting the shit, this was actually the big problem I had with it. Another way I would frame it is that people need to care about what's most probable, even though we are all flawed human beings with extremely limited knowledge. Our potential to survive, and have the most wisdom, wellbeing, and meaning in life, is partly tied to our probability deduction ability, both as individuals and as a collective intelligence. So it's in our best interest to try to criticize, in good faith communication, what we disagree with in other people's philosophies, and try to see how patterns of information point to what is most probable.
And if we do this really well, we mutate bad ideologies into good ones instead of potentially strengthening them by arguing for them to disappear: like if someone could figure out how to turn wokeness into a probabilistically philosophical and scientific focus into the causes of human tribalism, which is where I think it needs to go in order to focus more on the good intentions within the ideology.
I'd also add it looks like the critical theories that make up wokeness (according to James Lindsay and Hellen Pluckrose) mostly come from feminist women although they used ideas from Foucalt, Derrida, and Marx who are all obviously men. And as a generalization there are different gender brain differences. So to the degree that ideologies can be representations of scientifically-valid generalizations around gendered psychology, and wokeness is an example of this in being a feminine-leaning ideology, it's theoretically possible that women might have the most potential to do the most to change wokeness into something much wiser.