Alex Jacob wrote:It is not black and white enough, Kelly, to make a positive assertion about it. I think I referred to Nietzsche and Weininger recently as giving evidence of a very troubled context (National Socialism and deep upsets in the fabric of German society), but it is not my assertion that mental illness appears in all geniuses. I appreciate that Kevin and Dave and Dan seek to place a great emphasis on 'genius', and to explain it, set it apart, identify it with masculinity. I can and will say that there are aspects to this emphasis that I value, and have incorporated.
I do however think that a peculiar trend in Western intellectualism can lead to a sort of over-heating of the mind. Carl Jung seemed to be aware of this when he was working through some intense, psychic and intellectual periods, and to get through it he availed himself of certain 'Eastern breathing techniques'. I distinctly felt, in Nietzsche's case, that he pushed himself over the line, but that he also suffered from a sort of internal fracturing due to unsolvable emotional issues.
I do not believe that you or anyone here has a 'virtually perfect understanding of the nature of ultimate reality' (why did you include the word virtually?) You seem to have a very limited grasp of life, and have impoverished mental lives.
I think that this sort of idea [enlightenment] is Eastern exclusively, yogic, and represents a 'mood of the mind' more than anything substantial. I believe that in you (plural)---semi-educated rustics with limited literacy---this notion functions like a dangerous narcotic, it intoxicates you, it poisons you, you get very filled up with yourself, but it also deforms you. The conclusion I am beginning to form is that, at least in some ways, you are intellectual casualties who are externalizing a pathology having to do with core disunity of personality.
To concoct a diagnosis should also mean that one could recommend a cure, yet it seems to me that the nature of the neurosis is such that it itself resists any possible cure. The resisting of cure is part of the pathology? There was once a patient with deep-seated mental issues. Yet, she kept seeing her psychologist though she was not open to his council. One day she described a dream she had of a 'fantastic flying machine' that was huge, vast, intricate and yet exciting, complex, meaningful. Her psychologist lightly suggested that, perhaps, this 'flying machine' was emblematic of her neurosis, to which she immediately asserted 'No!' with tremendous adamancy. He was never able to help her to break through her machine-like neurosis...(It was a female patient, I am not just doing this because you are female).
At this point, after one year, I think of you-all in this way, I am sorry to say. Neurotics with elaborate defenses, elaborate machines that must be defended.
Kelly Jones wrote:That's a definite positive. To paraphrase yourself: those who talk about a virtually perfect understanding of the nature of Ultimate Reality are intellectually deformed. I'll put the topic slightly differently: "Wisdom of the Infinite is inseparable from neurosis." Title: "Wisdom inseparable from neurosis" for short. For the purposes of this discussion, the Wisdom of the Infinite means "having a virtually perfect understanding of the nature of Ultimate Reality".
Apart from that, it's a good topic. It is a modern myth that there is "a fine line between genius and madness", so it would be interesting to see if the debate can expose this.
Alex Jacob wrote:Since there is no way for you to demonstrate, in any concrete way, what is 'ultimate reality' or even that there is an 'ultimate reality', the conversation is skewed from the start.
And that is basically what I am saying: that you suppose you have access to some special knowledge about 'ultimate reality' indicates to me---largely because of all you negate in the process of your assertion---that you have not one, not two, but a number of screws loose.
in certain states I have experienced I feel I have caught a glimpse 'ultimate things' (the way things are, ultimately). If I have those intimations, and you also have those intimations, and your ideas lead you to conclude things radically different from myself, however could that be resolved?
Alex Jacob wrote: When David, as he has in recent posts, talks about enlightenment as a step far above exalted emotion, he is referring to something abstract, to an idea of enlightenment, or to what someone could glean from the writings of the 'enlightened'.
He refrains from talking about enlightenment in the first person, yet if he did, one would know it is himself talking about his own experience. It would be, of course, evidence derived from experience.
Only through repetition can the pupil make the material his own. I repeat, I suppose, because one day---perhaps before the Apocalypse---some eetsie-bitsy part of this will make it through your thick skull. One day, in the future, these seeds I have planted are going to germinate and grow in you. Then, a glorious and deeply beautiful flower will appear out of your nostril, and lo! it shall be a sort of carnivorous Venus fly-trap, and it will see you and smile, wink once or twice, and then devour you right then and there!
You will see me in the field of fate on a high-spirited black war-horse with flashing eyes and foaming at the mouth. I shall be wearing over my armour a white vest with a red cross blazoned upon it. Seek me if you dare...
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests