It is a long-standing hermeneutical precept that all understanding is ultimately self-understanding. Who we are, who we think we are, what we “get”, what we understand, however, depends to a large extent not only on what we experience, but how we experience it; on how we “see”. There is a wide range of ways that we can approach the idea of “seeing”, and we have been exploring these in a number of CCafé sessions over the years. The topic can be approached philosophically, perceptually, but also individually psychologically. Here we are rather apparently dealing with a “this-as-well-as-that” situation, not merely an all-too-often assumed “either-or”.
In this particular session, we want to continue the conversation on Bildung (education) that we began last time, but we also have the opportunity to expand that discussion in meaningful ways. We agreed (at least in principle) that all Bildung or education is a cultivation and development of the “self” (whatever that may mean specifically to any of us), as well as a contribution to the individual’s own understanding of the place or role in the society and culture in which they find themselves. How we “see” how we see often determines to a significant extent what we let into our heads and hearts and why, and this applies not only to our “normal”, everyday experience, but even more so to irruptive or anomalous experiences as well, a topic we have been increasingly exploring as of late.
Reading / Watching / Listening
-
Conversation Contribution on biases, based on McLaren (<1000 words)
McLaren_2020_13 Biases.pdf (81.3 KB) -
Summary graphic of Betti/Steiner’s overview of worldviews
12 ways of seeing the world, v02_20210407na.pdf (48.4 KB) -
Regarding irruptive/anomalous experience:
The Phenomenon (2020) | Trailer HD - YouTube
Seed Questions
-
The idea “ways of seeing”, even though it is based on a visual metaphor, can be understood in a wide variety of ways. How aware are you of your own use of this particular metaphor?
-
Gebser advanced the thesis that the eye could be considered the “spiritual organ” of the Mental structure of consciousness. Goethe’s way of seeing went beyond the merely perceptual; Steiner’s ways are philosophical/foundational; McLaren’s are individual/psychological. How do you reconcile these varying approaches in your own understanding of “seeing”?
-
How much or how significantly have you revised your own way(s) of seeing over time? What tips or recommendations might you have for helping others wrestling with their own?
Context, Backstory, and Related topics
Cafés
-
Cosmos Café [2020-02-25] – The Idea of the World 1 (Part I) (which contains link to clip on Betti’s book)
-
Cosmos Café [2021-06-10]: The Wholeness of Nature 7 (which contains links to the entire series of sessions)
Reading
-
Betti, Mario (2001) Twelve Ways of Seeing the World: Philosophies and Archetypal Worldviews for Understanding Human Consciousness, Translated by Matthew Barton, Stroud/UK, The Hawthorn Press.
-
Bortoft, Henri (1996) The Wholeness of Nature: Goethe’s Way of Science, Edinburgh/UK, Floris Books, 6th printing 2018.
-
Kastrup, Bernardo (2019) The Idea of the World: A Multi-disciplinary Argument for the Mental Nature of Reality, Winchester, UK/Washington, DC, USA, iff Books.
-
Steiner, Rudolf (2015) Human and Cosmic Thought, Forest Row/UK, Rudolf Steiner Press, 1961.
