Thread 40980441

1. Two Types of Thought

- You are not one, but many: the self is an ecology of impulses and agents.
- You are one: the traveler: awareness moves among these agents without fusing to any one.

2. Two Worlds

- Vision is law: the true self acts from chosen vision, not from reward.
- The outer is canvas: inner truth must be expressed in outward roles and works.

3. Archetypes

- The hero never regrets: success and failure alike affirm chosen action.
- The fool forgets himself: lapsing into laziness or misidentification diminishes the traveler.

4. Virtue

- Dissociation is ego: mistaking a fragment for the whole self is dissociation.
- Integration is virtue: steward the agents, keep the system whole.

5. Rewards

- Satisfaction is earned: apathy is absence of results; virtue creates feedback.
- Happiness is integrity: lesser selves chase rewards; the hero’s joy is vision fulfilled.

I think Prometheus is a representation of the tragic state of the hero, which is also similar to the tragedy between the Dionysian and Apollonian (Nietzsche's argument).

Zeus represents the order of the universe which punishes the risen consciousness with pain and futility (remember, he's chained) that the self had never experienced before it became committed to virtue (demonstrated in the way Prometheus sacrifices himself for humanity, much like many other "hanged men").

The Prometheus version of this story is grim, but some people respond to grimness more than optimism (which is the version that Christianity tried to teach originally).

>>40980441 (OP)
>- You are not one, but many: the self is an ecology of impulses and agents.
>- You are one: the traveler: awareness moves among these agents without fusing to any one.

One correction here:
This should say the BODY is an ecology of impulses and agents, and the traveler is the true self. That resolves a potential contradiction if you aren't understanding the word play.

I have to leave to go eat dinner. If none of you respond with interesting comments or the thread is 404ed by the time I get back, I will pummel you for eternity in my mind.

Since I don't want to be pummeled for eternity:
I agree with you on 1 and 4 at least. Could you go into more detail on what you mean by heroism and virtue? I'd like to understand your moral framework, since I'm struggling to find one for myself.

>>40982111
>Since I don't want to be pummeled for eternity:
I've crossed you off the list.
>Could you go into more detail on what you mean by
>heroism
I am referring to the hero in the hero's or fool's journey. The hero is an archetype that goes through trials and then overcomes, and often this implies something important in the real physical world, but it doesn't really have to.
> and virtue?
This is a trickier one. Virtue is an integration of both rule following and rule creation. People like to list "virtues" such as bravery, honesty, etc, as though these are principles that one should follow and be virtuous, but frankly I think this is just a misunderstanding of the older texts on virtue. True virtue is more self-authored, although there's also a component where you're integrating with broader society/humanity.
In other words, virtue isn't one thing, but it is the connective tissue between many things. I also think of virtue as the one thing that leads you out of Plato's Cave, because virtue is the pursuit of the ideal, which are the forms that Plato says exist outside of the cave. In other words, you escape the limitations of your body and your identity with it by pursuing thought forms themselves.

>>40982111
>I'd like to understand your moral framework, since I'm struggling to find one for myself.
I'm doing a few things here.

I'm trying to make sense of ideas that are out there in popular consciousness. For instance, there is an idea in New Age philosophy that your identity is "pure awareness", not anything else. Rhonda Byrne wrote about this in her book The Greatest Secret. Well, it sounds a lot like the idea of the Solar Word that Edouard Schure wrote about in his theosophical books of the late 1800s. There's this idea in western philosophy that the same truth is rediscovered over and over again, and it is taught but only partially understood by society. But if you do truly discover it, then you have the ultimate secret of all of these religions (from Christianity to Hinduism to Buddhism) all at once.

I'm also trying to lay out principles that lead up to explaining a lesson that I learned today. The lesson is the point about rewards, but you have to see how this is contextual to the other principles. So, in following your vision, in pursuing virtue, there is no additional reward to be had. Of course, good things happen to those with good karma (ie those who follow virtue), but you shouldn't pursue good karma BECAUSE you want good things to happen to you. This would just turn it into an economic decision instead of a moral one, and this is the kind of thing that is central legalism, which Christianity was very explicitly against (Pharisees).

I've taken these ideas to heart and tried to live in accordance to them, and I've seen my life get a lot better (including my mental state but also my willingness to be social and expand my horizons in a lot of positive ways), but occasionally I'll have a down few days. Where my mind drifts during that time is towards "Why am I doing this? How do I benefit?" And there is no real escape from this questioning if you aren't willing to do things because you believe in their virtue alone. Otherwise, you DO need rewards.

>>40982181
>I'm trying to make sense of ideas that are out there in popular consciousness. For instance, there is an idea in New Age philosophy that your identity is "pure awareness", not anything else. Rhonda Byrne wrote about this in her book The Greatest Secret. Well, it sounds a lot like the idea of the Solar Word that Edouard Schure wrote about in his theosophical books of the late 1800s. There's this idea in western philosophy that the same truth is rediscovered over and over again, and it is taught but only partially understood by society. But if you do truly discover it, then you have the ultimate secret of all of these religions (from Christianity to Hinduism to Buddhism) all at once.
My point about this is that it's partly true but incomplete. I like to read about esoteric ideas, but I never just assume the author is right. It has to make sense to me before I'm willing to believe. I might be willing to experiment, but I won't trust things with no proof.

So, there's a lot of dualism in esotericism. I think these contradictory ideas need to be contextualized so that you don't get misunderstandings. That's my point with all of these.

>>40982149
Interesting. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I'll try to rotate them around in my mind for a while.