Cosmos Café [2021-06-24]: Does "Bildung" have a future?

[johnnydavis54 (john davis)]

@Lisa

Yes, Daniel does speak in a systems-scientific language in many of the videos. I think that has been a deliberate choice on his part, so that he would be taken seriously by the people who can only exist in the “upper right quadrant.”

And what happens if you stay in 3rd person systems thinking? It turns into overload. And the discourse boundaries dissolve as you zoom further and further out and starts to fade away into deep space 9. Most of his audience will space out.

@Lisa

I know that he knows that a shift in consciousness, in how we conceive of each other vis a vis the Whole, is necessary.

I’m sure he does, too, but he is not working with 1st person orientation and so comes across in my view as a very deep and narrow thinker. He needs to zoom back in, somewhere in between the big picture getting too big and the ant that can move a rubber tree plant. His presentation is excellent as far as it goes but it perhaps goes too far for most mortals and doesn’t integrate all of the quadrants even a little bit. So, his audience will be the silicon valley super nerds who run the world already. He is right about a great deal but is still in a problem space seeking a solution that is stuck in a 3D orientation.

How do we go beyond and then return and realize we are already have what we need?

@Lisa

Although I wanted to do a diagram of that talk, I ended up doing a Cliff’s Notes type of summary for some other friends of mine who complained that they didn’t know his “language.”

Ah shucks! I was really looking forward to one of your diagrams that will make all things plain. I don’t blame you for this as this is such a dizzying task but I would like to roll up my sleeves and start getting into the dirt with bare feet , a stick in my right hand and start doing drawings that have a “lyric” tendency. I might also do some somatic syntax. If we can’t do a meta-dance we are not integrated, yet. I will need some colored chalk too. Will you bring some scissors and paper ,Lisa?

About Lyric Philosophy. The dialect has failed us. We oscillate between thesis and antithesis until a synthesis happens. But the synthesis, as poet/thinker Jan Zwicky says, only adds on something. It never transforms the polarity. Only metaphor can do that, not more logical arguments. We need the poetic logics of a Nagarjuna who can play with Void without staying in the Void.

So, what follows is my fantasy for doing a meta-diagram of the dilemma we are in. My desired outcome is to move out of the 3D grid and into a 5D collage. What happens if we moved from a pie chart to Zwicky’s favorite Necker Cube?

We have lots of opportunities for some background/foreground shifts that Daniel I’m sure is able to relate to but that the audience he is addressing probably don’t want to. The visual system can be used to do more than just isolate us in the visual system. We can create gestures, overlaps, between visual and kinesthetic and subtle forms and exo-linguistics. This is a new artform

From this

to this-

and also this-

These Cubes are from Lex Neale’s work which I recommend.

“The analogical is always richer than the digital.” -Brian Massumi

Having studied Goethe’s Way we can appreciate Matt Segall’s imagination on display in this brief video.

Diagramming German Idealism 5: Goethe's Participatory Scientific Method

Matt’s visualization of Hegel, brings attention to the dead end of the dialectic, culminating in the Master/Slave conundrum, a problem that has haunted our politics and which Daniel has re-labeled as conflict between Group A and Group B

Diagram of Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit

I highly recommend his video diagram series on German Idealism if you have an interest. This is background knowledge that helps us clarify the food fights of the last centuries.

And if you have followed me thus far let’s take another leap into this century which has just captured a mysterious anomaly that the CIA has verified. We are in new territory without maps. We have evidence of object in the air and under water that defy the laws of inertial physics.

Pentagon declassifies Navy 'UFO' videos (VIDEO 2/3)

And when we have evidence of objects that defy the laws of physics what happens to the struggle between the Masters and the Slaves? What new living arrangements become possible?

There are some of us ( myself included) who have inter-dimensional contact with 5D intelligence. This is where a new kind of boundary dynamics between I, We, and Its are starting to become more porous and flexible. This is when the toroidal shapes we have been studying could be of great use. And when we have absorbed these maps for new territories what kind of performances will we be sponsoring?

This is a rough beginning as we try to sketch the New Human arising from the ashes of the Civilization collapse well under way. I am tuning into the fields of all possibility. Find a space that knows about all of these spaces. I will meet you there.

[MarcoMasi]

Thank you Lisa for the extended summary of Daniel’s talk, it is useful to recall the rationale behind it.

@Lisa

Although I wanted to do a diagram of that talk, I ended up doing a Cliff’s Notes type of summary for some other friends of mine who complained that they didn’t know his “language.”

Sometimes diagram or mind maps are helpful. Sometimes they tend to dissect and hamper a wholistic vision of things. That’s at least my experience.

@Lisa

Yes, Daniel does speak in a systems-scientific language in many of the videos. I think that has been a deliberate choice on his part, so that he would be taken seriously by the people who can only exist in the “upper right quadrant.”

The question is wehter this encourages them to go beyond that quadrant or, to the contrary, encourages them to get stuck in it and hampers a view beyond those boundaries? My feeling is that system-scientific language is still a “whole as a sum of its parts” viewpoint. To the single unit it adds the interaction between units, but essentially does not go beyond an analytic processual understanding. It is the intuition of the mind that the whole has an inherent foundation but still struggles to transcend the orthodox paradigm and, therefore, does its utmost to reduce it to that paradigm.

On a similar line here a critical review of the notion of “neurodiversity” so fashionable nowadays. It is, indeed, an intuition of a deep truth (deep down we are a unity in diversity), but there is this analytic reductionist physicalist culture that couldn’t resist the temptation to drag it down again to the usual neurocentric conception. Fortunately some are becoming aware of this and the consequences of this still too narrow approach is described in this interesting piece:

Neurodiversity is not enough. We should embrace psydiversity | Aeon Essays

[johnnydavis54 (john davis)]

@Michael_Stumpf

The Surprising Healing Qualities of Dirt, what Elements,Nutrients & “Attuning Too” Can We Engage In with the Mother/Matrix in Our Bones
& Surroundings of US?

From the Aeon Essay-
“psydiversity holds that the mind and ‘human nature’ are not unitary things, but are profoundly embedded and even constituted by the society and context in which they appear. That isn’t to deny the reality of difference, but rather to situate this reality as part of an unfolding social and historical process”

@johnnydavis54

I would like to roll up my sleeves and start getting into the dirt with bare feet , a stick in my hand and start doing drawings that have a “lyric” tendency. I might also do some somatic syntax. If we can’t do a meta-dance we are not integrated, yet.

Our bodies are elegant transformers that can take diverse information/stimulations from different sources, and externalize, through movement, drawing, diagrams, writing, reading, playing a fiddle, different ways of creating context and meaning. To demand that math and science produced by brains in vats is our future is like trying to shoot yourself in the foot and try to run a relay race.

Rather than waste precious energy in such twisted debates, I agree with Daniel when he quotes Bucky Fuller. Let’s move towards what we want to have happen. Let’s create new models rather than get lost in critique. This is not the same thing as a goal, which is a pre-decided definition of what you want in line with the powers that already have dominance. A desired outcome is not a solution to a problem. To register your actual desire ( rather than to read a menu of what others think you should want) and to resonate with the invisible structure of the whole, is to tune into your entire sensorium. This requires that we put our desire into forms ( metaphors, narratives) that are speakable and drawable and sharable. If you have a desire and you can’t draw it, or keep it a secret, you probably will not be able to create it.

This is what visionaries, shamans and archaic persons have already done and the magical structure is well established in human societies and will not go away even though the deficient rational regime does its best to label, diagnose and dismiss.

So, I resonate with Bucky on this one. Know what you really want, draw it, dance it, sing it, share it, make it happen. And do the math. Our networks provide us with more than enough tech that gets in our way. We need to register the rhythms of head, heart, gut and move towards what we want rather than get trapped in polarities and endless food fights with critiques that are coming from nowhere.