- Stage 0 -- Spiritual innocence. [This phrase is not used by Zarathustra (Nietzsche), but I presume there is an original, innocent state of being prior to the first transformation.]
- Transformation #1: "How the spirit becomes a camel..."
- Stage 1 -- The camel: The spirit that would "bear much"
- e.g., "stepping into filthy waters when they are the waters or truth"; "loving those who despise us", "climbing high mountains to tempt the tempter" [I don't quite get this one!]
- Transformation #2: "...the camel, a lion..."
- Stage 2 -- The lion: the spirit "who would conquer his freedom and be master of his own fate".
- "Here he seeks out his last master: he wants to fight him and his last god; for the ultimate victory he wants to fight with the great dragon."
- "Who is the great dragon whom the spirit will no longer call lord or god? 'Thou shalt' is the name of the great dragon. But the spirit of the lion says, 'I will'"
- "Why is there a need in the spirit for the lion? Why is not the beast of burden, which renounces and is reverent, enough?"
- "The creation of freedom for oneself and a sacred 'No' even to duty -- doer that, my brothers, the lion is needed."
- Transformation #3: "...and the lion, finally, a child"
- Stage 3 -- The child: ?????????????????
- "What can the child do that even the lion could not do? Why must the preying lion still become a child?"
- "To create new values -- that even the lion cannot do"
- "The child is innocence and forgetting, a new beginning, a game, a self-propelled wheel, a first movement, a sacred 'Yes.'"
Speculating freely:
- Stage 1: The Camel = The typical (hard working) grad student; The established researcher engaged in "normal science" (as Kuhn defines the term); the typical "positive psychologist" (who is ultimately submissive to established values)
- Stage 2: The Lion = Newfound respect for the problem of value (including the perennial "is-ough" problem); the need to break away from old paradigms; revolutionary science (as Kuhn defines the term).
- Stage 3: The Child = The fifth joint point [????]; resolution of the "is-ough" problem [?????]
frank:
Looking forward to others thoughts and suggestions, especially about "meta-justification" (for me: freedom)
As someone who attended Jesuit high-school, undergraduate and graduate school (and now works at another Jesuit college), I suspect that you know a few things about "freedom" . . . <g>
As you know, freedom has many descriptions. Typically they fall into the "freedom from" (or "negative freedom") and "freedom to" (or "positive freedom.") Which one (or both) are you talking about . . . ??
Mark
P.S. In all your trips to Firenze, I suspect that you've toured the "Galileo Museum." It was originally the "History of Science Museum" and, as it turns out, my father helped to design it. It's one of my favorite places and I've even got a poster from the 1977 "Disegni de Fabriche Brunelleschaine" exhibit at the Uffizi in my loft.
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ama zon.com_Disegni-2Dfabbriche- 2Dbrunelleschiane-2DGabinetto- 2DCataloghi_dp_B00V28GKNK&d= DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4 uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1I XYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgj O2gOz4-A&m=bpDZjLV0oFkZA2Y_6Ih V6M9l8kFK2YPdD8igTLMRAvU&s=TvQ jMW_sjoLzY8dKXjNxY1yufb9aDCbrv zI_wjz63yY&e=
P.P.S. As you also know, some consider Dante to have been an "occultist" who was related to the Cathars and their notions of "perfection." His references to the "White Rose" are sometimes cited in that regard -- also appearing in your book's dedication. Someday I'd be curious about your views on all this, however, probably best kept off-list.
P.P.P.S. I'm sure you also know that your "Dante and Derrida: Face to Face" is available for download at various sites. Very interesting, indeed.
Quoting Frank Ambrosio <[log in to unmask]>:
Gregg,
thanks for the last installment of "what makes us different." It pulls the
pieces together in a clear understandable way, and points the way forward
effectively by focusing us on the fifth nodal point/dimension and the
question, "what has happened to the "person" in the last 50-30k years, and
what is the situation in which we find ourselves - together with the planet
as a whole, especially with regard to suffering?" In my view, your closing
paragraphs situate us right where we need/want to be:
"The hope here is that with the right kind of meta-awareness, perhaps we
can build a meta-justification system, one that is conducive to the coming
wave of change. A justification of justifications to use Waldemar’s frame.
That, Frank, is I think what you are getting at with the centrality of
personal identity and dignity. What I am envisioning is a combination of a
system that both integrates knowledge and fosters individual development,
all in a way that “dances” with how the world will change (and change us)
as it continues to accelerate. "
Looking forward to others thoughts and suggestions, especially about
"meta-justification" (for me: freedom)
Best,
Frank
Francis J. Ambrosio, PhD
Associate Professor of Philosophy
Senior Fellow, Center for New Designs in Learning and Scholarship
Georgetown University
202-687-7441
On Sun, Aug 19, 2018 at 8:09 PM Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
*From:* tree of knowledge system discussion <Ok, to move the conversation along, I developed a quick draft that gets at
why the JH is a new, central piece of the puzzle, as it frames the shift in
human consciousness and the emergence of large scale justification systems.
With this puzzle piece in place, then we are ready to focus on the “fifth
joint point” and the future of humanity.
G
[log in to unmask]> *On Behalf Of *Frank Ambrosio
*Sent:* Sunday, August 19, 2018 10:13 AM
*To:* [log in to unmask]
*Subject:* Re: re easy pieces
Gregg,
Just to be clear: I am all aboard for staying on topic here, the topic of
which pieces are minimally necessary for an integrated view of what makes
us different, both from other animals and AI. I am compressing the distinct
question of the logic of that integration, for now, into the question of
identifying the pieces.
Cheers,
Frank
Francis J. Ambrosio, PhD
Associate Professor of Philosophy
Senior Fellow, Center for New Designs in Learning and Scholarship
Georgetown University
202-687-7441
On Sun, Aug 19, 2018 at 3:52 PM Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Mark and Frank,
I think the concept of what constitutes a mental disorder is a fascinating
and important question (although I hope we stay on the topic of human
difference—perhaps this can be an asterisk for future exporation?). It
was the focus of one of my first theory papers
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www. >,gregghenriques.com_uploads_2_ 4_3_6_24368778_finalhd1.pdf&d= DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4 uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1I XYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgj O2gOz4-A&m=k4htm14sO0GrRKScsHw wHqJTeVTAkHCqFXa9yVlbR48&s= gKqegUk2vnzt0-Gh7YGEY85qgtvHKy tPDzXf_W_IvHs&e=
published prior to my unified theory work in 2002. The justification of
mental disorder and disease is crucial to our identity. Szasz said some
very important things. He also “over shot” in that, yes, people actually do
go crazy. Their perceptual-affect systems breakdown and they hallucinate
and their justification systems go haywire and they form delusions. A
profound thought disorder is as evident of a broken mind as a heart attack.
If someone grabbed their chest, screamed in pain and died, we would say
something was wrong with them, even if we found no lesions in their heart.
All that said, the majority of what we call mental illnesses, the neurotic
conditions, are by and large problems in living and coping that lead to
clinically significant levels of distress. They are mental-behavioral
problems, not diseases in the traditional medicine sense. Some blogs on
this issue:
What is a Mental Disorder?
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__my. >psychologytoday.com_blog_ theory-2Dknowledge_201201_ what-2Dis-2Dmental-2Ddisorder& d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vC I4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo 1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYB gjO2gOz4-A&m=k4htm14sO0GrRKScs HwwHqJTeVTAkHCqFXa9yVlbR48&s= lowwMA9FHJ_VRGReIVo1WulxFkSSDu gk5aURlPhwUg0&e=
Five Broad Models of Mental Illness
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__my. >psychologytoday.com_blog_ theory-2Dknowledge_201206_ five-2Dbroad-2Dmodels-2Dmental -2Dillness-2D1&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbW YnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_ 5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP- UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m= k4htm14sO0GrRKScsHwwHqJTeVTAkH CqFXa9yVlbR48&s=Y7-TiYgGDBPAaJ UiJH25gRplgdKF5EVf8Wxo3ZYVlZI& e=
Mental Disorders Vs Diseases
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__my. >psychologytoday.com_blog_ theory-2Dknowledge_201305_ mental-2Ddisorders-2Dvs- 2Ddiseases&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpn zycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_ 5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP- UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m= k4htm14sO0GrRKScsHwwHqJTeVTAkH CqFXa9yVlbR48&s=X8iIHyVuwaikdt fl8ALHLE7OLl03-x3MEafB9NfiUQQ& e=
This one is on Szasz:
Is Psychiatry the Science of Lies?
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__my. >psychologytoday.com_blog_ theory-2Dknowledge_201212_is- 2Dpsychiatry-2Dthe-2Dscience- 2Dlies&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycB Cgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_ 5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP- UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m= k4htm14sO0GrRKScsHwwHqJTeVTAkH CqFXa9yVlbR48&s=3NBiyjG_A-eppO GVPQiCyfE0nreUhtpsim6LAwCyYbM& e=
Best,
Gregg
-----Original Message-----
From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]u>
On Behalf Of Mark Stahlman
Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2018 8:30 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: easy pieces
Frank:
Very interesting -- thanks . . . !!
As you know, Ernest Becker was "mentored" by Thomas Szasz, an important
figure in the "anti-psychiatry" movement of the 1960s.
Just as we are now in another "counter-culture," Szasz was in the middle
of his (along with some of the rest of us.) The last time this happened,
RADIO psychology -- particularly the medical version -- came
under attack by the *new* techno-paradigm TELEVISION types.
Psychiatry lost.
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiki pedia.org_wiki_Thomas-5FSzasz& d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vC I4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo 1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYB gjO2gOz4-A&m=XAkYRpRyVB6UU9pFY Hb8b9G4xQy0T81UTArZU-8mBDE&s=y 5HRC2ZOx6lt3U-JNJCXfztJ-zUX7az msaSvzsK4thE&e
=
His 1961 "The Myth of Mental Illness" and 1970 "The Manufacture of
Madness" accompanied Michel Foucault's 1961 "History of Madness" &c.
One of the components which fed all this was the use of LSD -- beginning
and becoming widespread in psychotherapy in the 1950s and then spread by
the anti-psychiatrists in the 1960s, including after it became illegal --
which was viewed by some as "mimicking" psychosis, while others saw it as
opening the "Doors of Perception." How's that for "counter" views
(reminding us of the recent "Entropic Brain" post by Gregg) . . . !!
Wikipedia notes --
"Szasz argued throughout his career that mental illness is a metaphor for
human problems in living, and that mental illnesses are not "illnesses" in
the sense that physical illnesses are; and that except for a few
identifiable brain diseases, there are "neither biological or chemical
tests nor biopsy or necropsy findings for verifying DSM diagnoses."
"Szasz maintained throughout his career that he was not anti-psychiatry
but was rather anti-coercive psychiatry. He was a staunch opponent of civil
commitment and involuntary psychiatric treatment but believed in, and
practiced, psychiatry and psychotherapy between consenting adults."
Yes, the closing of mental institutions was one of the results. As are at
least some aspects of the increase in "mass killings" &c.
In the summer of 1967 (aka "The Summer of Love," when I was in
Haight-Ashbury looking for some LSD), the Tavistock Institute held a
conference at what was probably the peak of this movement -- called the
"Dialectics of Liberation Congress" (and published under the title "To Free
a Generation") -- organized by David Cooper, their resident
"anti-psychiatrist" (and a colleague of R.D. Laing, widely nominated to
take over for Tim Leary, also a psychologist, as the LSD "guru.")
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wiki pedia.org_wiki_Dialectics-5Fof -5FLiberation-5FCongress&d= DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4 uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1I XYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgj O2gOz4-A&m=XAkYRpRyVB6UU9pFYHb 8b9G4xQy0T81UTArZU-8mBDE&s=4PD B5jFs232nZnFGRrkUQ4nEyaGOmGie8 A_C7rRTwA0&e
=
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ama zon.com_Free-2DGeneration-2DDa vid-2DCooper_dp_B000V2FMZA&d= DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4 uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1I XYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgj O2gOz4-A&m=XAkYRpRyVB6UU9pFYHb 8b9G4xQy0T81UTArZU-8mBDE&s=Iz7 r3gjr1MToZMRqRZJIMlml-eFd3p1pd Ouxh3zghrc&e
=
"Emergent cosmic reality" and "cosmic information exchange dynamism"
would likely have been phrases that would have been right at home there .
. . <g>
Mark
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
mailto:TOK-SOCIETY-L-SIGNOFF-R[log in to unmask] or click the
following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
mailto:TOK-SOCIETY-L-SIGNOFF-R[log in to unmask] or click the
following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
mailto:TOK-SOCIETY-L-SIGNOFF-R[log in to unmask] or click the
following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:TOK-SOCIETY-L-SIGNOFF-R[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:TOK-SOCIETY-L-SIGNOFF-R[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1