Agnostic.com

3 3

I found this to be one of the most interesting Podcasts or Lectures I have ever heard. Listen and comment:

the title is: Daniel Schmachtenberger: Steering Civilization Away from Self-Destruction | Lex Fridman Podcast #191
dalefvictor 8 June 16
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

3 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

I listened to it about four times, one can download the transcript, hard to read but the words are there.

0

A very interesting topic for discussion, as for me! Personally, I believe that in order for us to come to an eternal and good life, we need to find harmony first of all in ourselves. As soon as you find it in yourself, then interaction with the outside world will dramatically improve much better. That's why you can go through various spiritual practices and all that, I began to devote a lot of time to mental balance and I want to start recording my own podcast on this topic. Now I'm looking for the best platform for podcasts. Someone might be interested in this?

1

Great explanation of dialectical synthesis as it can relate to societal and international disagreements. Schmachtenberger's explanations definitely engaged me to think about how a way to engage with those people with whom I disagree can be an opportunity to gain a more enlightened perspective that is above our two opposing perspectives. It is to see the commonalities between the two antithetical perspectives. Hopefully, by listening to the end, I can absorb and develop that ability. I like the phrases "perspective-seeking driving perspective-taking, then seeking synthesis"... "rigorous empathy or shared pathos"... that create... "a shared bonding." One needs to work on: knowing how it feels to be the other -- as a way to bridge "the partial perspectives at war with each other."

When I was in college I studied Philosophy. Hegel was the first larger-than-life personality I studied and it changed the way I perceive the world. I then got to Marx and as much of his research was about economy and money it was an easy lesson to learn. There are many other Philosophers after these two and much more to be said. The last two people I studied were Merleau-Ponty and Sartre. Maurice was the best as he had the most complete synthesis I had read so far. That was over forty-five years ago and to all still rings true. It is hard stuff to read until one gets used to the language. We do have to know what words mean and how to use them. Much of politics today need people to be confused and use and see the words used as meaning other than what they mean. Will we get past this or perrish.

@dalefvictor
Good question - will we survive or perish. I'm a member of a climate group, and we are asked to bridge the gaps in belief and understanding between our views and ultra conservative views. For me that is very difficult, since I perceive most of them as selfish and arrogant. I'd like to find a way to understand them, and to rise above my perspective and see a bigger picture. I ask myself: 'Is it impossible to find value in those we consider selfish fools?' What would Maurice Merleau-Ponty say about that?

@AnonySchmoose It has been forty-five years since I read Maurice, but he would probably turn it into the process of perception. Since (most) people do not have the ability to see further than the tv and do not read it is going to be a hard topic. Today I saw a segment on BookTV where a man from the Manhattan Institute wrote a book about researching the topic. He said he tried to do this without any prejudices. I will find the site: [c-span.org] the name of the book is Unsettled. I do not know the tilt on the Manhattan Institute.

@AnonySchmoose Try this site if you have not already found it. [neurohacker.com]

@dalefvictor
Thanks... will check it out....

@AnonySchmoose This is a link to Fareed Zakaria's website on CNN. Today he had an interesting anthropologist talk about her book, which was about how people see things differently. [cnn.com]

@dalefvictor
Okay, thanks.

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:603865
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.