🐟 03. WISDOM, KNOWLEDGE, & TRUTH: PHILOSOPHY DEFINED: Philosophy is the love of WISDOM, normally encapsulated within a formal academic discipline. Wisdom is the soundness of an action or a decision with regard to the application of experience, knowledge, insight, and good judgement. Wisdom may also be described as the body of knowledge and principles that develops within a specified society or period. For example, “The wisdom of the Tibetan lamas.” Etymologically, the word originates from the Greek “philosophia” (meaning “love of wisdom”) and is the systematized study of general and fundamental questions, such as those about existence, reason, knowledge, values/ethics, mind, and language. Some sources claim the term was coined by Pythagoras (c. 570 - c. 495 BC). Philosophical methods include questioning, critical discussion, rational argument, and systematic presentation. Philosophers generally divide their field into the two kingdoms, the Eastern branch, which covers the entire Asian continent, and the Western branch of philosophy, which mainly includes European, though in recent centuries, embraces American and Australian-born philosophers also. GENUINE WISDOM: Unfortunately, in most cases in which this term is used, particularly outside of ancient Indian philosophical traditions, it tacitly or implicitly refers to ideas and ideologies that are quite far-removed from genuine wisdom. For instance, the typical academic philosopher, especially in the Western tradition, is not a lover of actual wisdom, but a believer in, or at least a practitioner of, adharma, which is the ANTITHESIS of genuine wisdom. Many Western academic (so-called) “philosophers” are notorious for using laborious sophistry, abstruse semantics, gobbledygook, and/or pseudo-intellectual word-play, in an attempt to justify their blatantly-immoral ideologies and practices, and in many cases, fooling the ignorant layman into accepting the most horrendous crimes as not only normal and natural, but holy and righteous! In “The Republic” the ancient Greek philosopher Aristocles (commonly known as Plato) quotes his mentor Socrates as asserting that the “best” philosophers are, in actual fact, naught but useless, utter rogues, in stark contrast to “true” philosophers, who are lovers of wisdom and truth. An ideal philosopher, on the other hand, is one who is sufficiently intelligent to understand that morality is, of necessity, based on the law of non-violence (“ahiṃsā”, in Sanskrit), and sufficiently wise to live his or her life in such a harmless manner. See Chapter 12 regarding morality. THE REPOSITORY OF WISDOM: One of the greatest misunderstandings of modern times is the belief that philosophers (and psychologists, especially) are, effectively, the substitutes for the priesthood of old. It is perhaps understandable that this misconception has arisen in the popular mind, because the typical priest/monk/rabbi/mullah seems to be an unschooled buffoon, compared with those highly-educated gentlemen who have attained collegiate doctorates in philosophy, psychology, psychiatry, et cetera. However, as mentioned in more than a few places in this book, it is imperative to understand that only a miniscule percentage of all those who claim to be spiritual teachers are ACTUAL “brāhmaṇa” (as defined in Chapter 20). Therefore, the wisest philosophers of the present age are still those exceptionally rare members of the Holy Priesthood! Anyone who doubts this averment need do nothing more than read the remaining chapters of this Holy Scripture in order to learn this blatantly-obvious fact. POPULAR PHILOSOPHERS: At the very moment these words of mine are being typed on my laptop computer, there are probably hundreds of essay papers, as well as books and articles, being composed by professional philosophers and Theologians, both within and without academia. None of these papers, and almost none of the papers written in the past, will have any noticeable impact on human society, at least not in the realm of morals and ethics, which is obviously the most vital component of civilization. And, as mentioned in a previous paragraph, since such “lovers-of-wisdom” are almost exclusively adharmic (irreligious and corrupt) it is indeed FORTUITOUS that this is the case! The only (so-called) philosophers who seem to have any perceptible influence in the public arena are “pop” or “armchair” philosophers, such as Mrs. Alisa “Alice” O’Connor (known more popularly by her pen name, Ayn Rand), and the British author, Mr. Clive Staples “C.S.” Lewis, almost definitely due to the fact that they have published well-liked books and/or they have managed to promulgate their ideas via the mass media, especially on the World Wide Web. ACADEMIC PHILOSOPHERS: To proffer merely one example of literally tens of thousands, of the assertion made in the previous paragraph, the 1905 essay paper by the famed British mathematician, philosopher and logician, Bertrand Russell, entitled “On Denoting” was described by one of his most notable contemporaneous colleagues, Frank P. Ramsey, as “that paradigm of philosophy”. Notwithstanding the fact that less than one percent of the populace would be able to even comprehend the essay, it is littered with spelling, grammar, punctuation, and syntactic errors, and contains at least a couple of flawed propositions. Even if the average person was able to grasp the principles presented in that paper, it would not make any tangible impact on the human condition. Currently, this planet of ours is doomed to devastation, due to moral decay and environmental degradation, and such overintellectualizing essay papers can do nothing to help improve our deeply harrowing, frightful, and lamentable predicament, especially those papers that deal with exceedingly-trivial subject matters, as does Russell’s paper (an argument for an acutely-abstruse concept in semantics). The fact that Russell’s aforementioned essay paper falls under the category of Philosophy of Language, and the fact that he was a highly-cultured peer of the House of Lords, in the parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain, yet his own writings being composed using far-from-perfect English, serves only to prove my assertion that philosophy ought to be restricted to genuine members of the Holy Priesthood. Furthermore, that Bertrand was fully intoxicated with adharmic (leftist) ideologies and practices, including sexual licentiousness and socialism (even supporting Herr Adolf Hitler’s Nazism, to some extent) indicates that he was no lover of ACTUAL wisdom. The fact that, after THOUSANDS of years following the publication of Plato’s “Republic”, not a single nation or a single country on this planet has thought it wise to accept Plato’s advice to promote a philosopher-king (“rāja-ṛṣi”, in Sanskrit) as the head of its social structure, more than adequately proves my previous assertions. Unfortunately, however, both Plato and his student, Aristotle, were themselves hardly paragons of virtue, since the former was an advocate of infanticide, whilst the latter favoured carnism (even stating that animal slaughter was mandatory). To my knowledge, the only philosopher in the Western academic tradition who was truly wise, was the German, Arthur Schopenhauer, since he espoused a reasonably accurate metaphysical position, as well as adhering to the law (that is, the one and only law, known as “dharma” in Bhārata) to a larger degree than most other Westerners. Hopefully, someday, I will discover another philosopher without India, to join Arthur! A CASE STUDY: Because there are literally tens of thousands of academic “philosophers” who adhere to the above misconception of what is an ACTUAL philosopher, I am loath to nominate a single person of whom to make mention. However, because the former University of Oxford scholar, Mr. Colin McGinn, claims to be the “best” philosopher in the history of humanity (a claim he has repeatedly made on his own website), I therefore have no reservations about using that fool as an ideal example for my position in relation to academic “philosophers”. In order to preface this case study, it should be noted that Mr. McGinn’s area of expertise is in the philosophy of mind, and he has written extensively on the subject. However, near the beginning of a videographed dialogue posted on the Internet, Colin admitted that he was unable to even proffer a cogent definition of the word “mind”! The fact that Colin garnered a Master of Arts degree in psychology from a prominent English university did not seem to help with his understanding of the mind, despite the fact that psychology is concerned entirely with the psyche! I am quite certain that there are several teenagers in Bhārata (India) who understand the topic more clearly than Mister McGinn, since they have been trained in Vedānta (see that Glossary entry). In fact, there is very little doubt in my mind that my precocious second daughter, Sītā Anna, would have much more fully understood the concepts of mind and consciousness by the time she had reached the age of TEN years, had she not been (effectively) kidnapped by a devilishly-wicked, evil, demonic, violent criminal organization known as the “Federal Government of Australia”. Cont...

thanks S K that's really nice to hear 🙏

Welcome aboard Justin! I'm delighted to hear it. The world needs more stoic sages 🧙‍♂️

Really appreciate this Martinyi

I appreciate the words of support 🙏

Thanks Jon me too!

Thank you! It's definitely not my strong suit but I'm loving how it's looking. Still feel like the left hand side of the shot needs something but it's definitely getting there

Ah that's really good feedback Ryan I appreciate that. I've been wondering why I ever stopped them now but these lessons take time to learn. Good luck with your 2024 kickstart!

I really appreciate that JJ and it is great to hear about the digging back through and the support

Yeah it's tough because even in the depths of it you can see the potential growth but that doesn't dispel the darkness. The night is darkest just before the dawn as they say and my lord is that dawn a sight for sore eyes

Wow I hope my struggles help you on your quest sean. It's a wonderful thing to be creating

Really appreciate that it's getting there now so hopefully the rise continues

They really are Ellis. I did toy with a video on her for a while but shelved it. I imagine it'll happen at some point. The thing is those earlier episodes are my favourites and not sure if it'd be cool to talk about them on youtube when she's taken them down. Still I could do something on some of her later videos for sure

@@TheLivingPhilosophy It is a shame she took them down although I do understand why she chose to. I would love to see any analysis of her you feel like producing. As a side note, writing this comment sent me to the Contrapoints archive (which was highly entertaining) but has me questioning the ethics of watching art that doesn't want to be seen by the artist - any thoughts?

@ellisfmorton4086 yeah I've wrestled with the same thing and probably shouldn't have shared it. I really don't know I definitely feel uncomfortable with it on one level but I've also heard Theryn who works with her a lot saying how she's watched those early videos dozens of times. I dunno. It's an odd one. I definitely am not sure enough to make a video about them but then they are the ones that I love the most so it's hard. Ethical conundrums. If I were to do it I'd love to message her and ask her but I'm not sure I'd reach her. Worth a try I guess

@TheLivingPhilosophy She must get a fair few messages, but I will say the quality of your work speaks for itself. It’s very much in the ballpark of her interests as someone who takes philosophy, and philosophy applied to life, seriously. There’s no harm in reaching out, I’m sure she appreciates every message that comes from the place that yours would. Either way, keep doing what you’re doing, love your videos ❤️

@@ellisfmorton4086 good point ellis maybe you're right. Worth a shot anyway if I do sit down to making something

Feedback appreciated. I think the channel update kind of necessitated a bit more and full talking head but on the other hand the departure from a script ended up adding a lot more length than I expected. That happened with the next one as well so I'm curious to learn if that's just this update type of content or whether that's liable to happen with regular episodes as well. All course corrections to be made but certainly won't be making ones this long so regularly

Delighted to hear it welcome aboard Brandon!

I really appreciate this feedback lucio - something to nibble on!

Oh my god that's a great idea! Bottle of wine I love it. Don't think I can legally arrange a crazed sex party but maybe a bit of wining and dining could be on the cards at least 😆 Sorry to hear about the Peterson fallout especially with cleanliness being closer to godliness and all

Thanks Bill much love ❤️

Don't worry there's still going to be plenty art only you'll also have to look at my mug for a few minutes every video

Thanks for the support bryan. I have thought about the Q&A format actually or rather it's been suggested to me by friends since they find in podcasts when I have to get into explaining things to people who aren't familiar with them it becomes more interesting and relateable. Something to think about!

Really appreciate this man it's good advice with the student identity. I have still yet to heed your recommendation of Pragmitism since Madrid but it is growing on the radar!

Well I hope my sharing goes some way to helping with yours. Nothing should stop us creating and it's easy for me to say that to you from the distance of not being you but of course when dealing with ourselves it's not so easy to just get over. Hope you power through to the Muse on your struggle as well ✊

Really appreciate this and all the comments. Amazing to see such support

Thanks Joe always a pleasure

Thanks Brendan! I'm sure my day of corruption will come yet but we've staved it off for another while at least 🙈

Thanks Mr Goatman I'll see what I can do!

Indeed! It's nice to be intoxicated but it does feel good to break out of a spell

@@TheLivingPhilosophy That’s a great way of putting it!

Y'know what you really might not be wrong. Although it's not usual for me in January but I remember a few years ago after a few days of consistent sunshine having the thought "I am really happy" spontaneously pop into my mind and I realised how important sunshine is to me. I've been saying to friends that I'd love to go away next January for 2 weeks- a month to somewhere sunny

Thanks Kaleb. Never went down the PhilosophyTube route but no reason why I won't in future. I did get into HBomber guy for a bit but nothing compares to Natalie really. Never heard of leftist cooks though I'll check it out!

Thanks Oisín much appreciated

Looks like a few of us are off to a rough one! Hope the fog blows off and turns into a great year for you

Thanks Rich for the insight and the feedback. Definitely a lot looser and rambly we'll see what happens when we hit more regular content and what happens to this rambling 😵‍💫

Rambling isn't necessarily a negative.It does allow the audience to take in what is important in the talk.@@TheLivingPhilosophy

Less Peterson unless its take downs. I think he's a fraud.

Ach I appreciate that michael but I'm just not sure. But maybe that uncertainty is something Peterson lacked. There's just something very humbling in his example and how far he has gone astray. As for the polarising subjects I agree and think that it's important to have those conversations but (and I reflect on this in the next episode) it requires the right container - free speech isn't merely a question of legality but of the right conditions for fruitful discourse. KZfaq can be that sometimes but sometimes it really isn't and that's part of the haphazard nature of things

@@TheLivingPhilosophy I watched the countra-points Peterson video, very entertaining and I agreed with a lot, especially at how 'Postmodern Marxist' is a contradiction in terms and displays a lack of understanding about the divisions within the left. But a one dimensional cartoonish enemy is always more useful than a nuanced one. Speaking of enemies, I noticed a lot of the people you mentioned you liked are probably at loggerheads with each other, but again I think that's really healthy. McGilchrist for example mentioned that he was quite fond of Douglas Murray, the Captain Murray in the culture wars who makes regular appearances on sky which I occasionally check in to and he's even a bit much for me.. Almost in the Hicks, Peterson, Lindsay camp. I haven't felt too drawn to places like countra-points, I guess in many respects I'm team terf on various issues.. but haven't really dug into it.

@@michaelmcclure3383 haha yeah that's a gem that was my first encounter with her as well. There is certainly a lot of loggerheads among the people I like and I'm very okay with that. I can see a lot of value in different individuals and still critique parts of them. I have a fondness for some of Murray but definitely he's become a bit cringy (to my mind anyway) with the whole Israel/Gaza affair. And McGilchrist definitely fits more on that side of things culture wars-wise - I still think he has a big blindspot with the postmodern but it's critical to his thesis that this leftism be wrong. Maybe something change in The Mattter With Things I'll be curious to find out. Nevertheless there's so much value there that I have a lot of love and respect for the man and his work

@@TheLivingPhilosophy I think that's a mature insight, to see that there is great value, even if there might be the odd blindspot, or bias. Thats something missing in the culture wars where easy dismissal on the basis of one comment or opinion (usually taken out of context), is the order of the day and where there is little questioning of ones tribal affiliations and assumptions. In many respects I agree with McGilchrist on the toxicity of woke, especially it's tight control of humour and its lack of nuance. He mentioned how the research shows that the left hemisphere is more prone to anger, narcissism and delusions of all kinds. It's more inclined to feel virtuous merely for holding a particular view (engaging anger and narcissism to expound it), whereas it's the right hemisphere that is actually capable of a compassionate response, because its interested in what's really going on and how individuals can best be served according to their particular situation.. Maybe this gets back to the previous discussion on virtue, it certainly reminds me of Lao Tzu The man of superior virtue is not [conscious of] his virtue, And in this way he really possesses virtue. The man of inferior virtue never loses [sight of] his virtue, And in this way he loses his virtue I guess we are all still growing and learning (or unlearning) no matter how enlightened haha He says another fascinating thing. He says the left hemisphere is about reorienting ourselves to beauty, goodness, truth whereas the right is primarily concerned with grasping power. If true, this would have various philosophical implications. Ultimately both hemispheres have to work together, it's the imbalance that's unhealthy.

Absolutely. Though I have come to doubt McGilchrist a little here as well - Contrapoints for example is one of the funniest creators I've ever encountered; same goes for Bo Burnham who certainly skews left. Meanwhile Ben Shapiro is not somebody I associate with humour nor Peterson. Perhaps the closer you are to the frontlines the more prone you are to moralism and maybe we might want to question the assumption that the new left is inherently humourless and prudish. Just a thought based on recent ruminations

LOL but now I'm trouble because the overthinking hole is too big. I guess I'll just keep overthinking till I come out in China

Thank you. There's a voice in here that might need a little more convincing but it does seem to be getting quieter

What does red pilled mean to you?

Tried it; it didn't take

😆

I did toy with this idea and even had a name for it but not sure if that'll happen now. Let's run the experiment here and we'll see what happens from there

My brothers are over in the heart of the Fordian madhouse of Toronto

That's very interesting! I actually thought this might be the case although admittedly I also thought it could go the other way and that I'd talk too fast if I was in normal talking mode

Thanks for the support chindico

Thanks James. I'd like to think that my equivalent will be the ramblings of Norm Macdonld 😆

@@TheLivingPhilosophy mmmyas. Try writing poems while listening to Mahler after two doobies, too. And always "pretend to pretend," something the ancient Romans erroneously believed the epitome of madness. Also, read Kierkegaard's "Either/Or," part 1 ('Diapsalmata [ad se ipsum]'). Punches the piss out of Rabelais!

@@TheLivingPhilosophy kzfaq.info/get/bejne/hdmVpMtouLOtpqM.html ....it's funny because it IS absurdly 'logical'

@@James-ll3jb hahah you don't want to see me after two doobies in fact I'd be such a whiter shade of pale that I might even be transparent though I must admit it's a nice picture you paint with hte Mahler and the Kierkegaard and I might try it sometime (without the 2 doobies though maybe I'll try an amount my nervous system can manage). Also: gotta love that university of science up there