What Is True?? - Harris & Peterson Debate Realism

[Markus]

3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Not really a fan of Sam's debating approach to life. He seems to like to debate everything and everybody. Which doesn't strike me as very conscious, although he is very articulate and logical.

When one's consciousness becomes deep enough, the debating attitude should stop IMO.

It seems to me from listening to his podcast that he does try to have a conscious dialogue with people rather than get into a debate. But then it turns into a debate as the other guest projects onto him and he starts defending himself from misinterpretation. I guess he doesn't quite fathom the egotistical nature of ideologues and how that makes it impossible to have a genuine conversation. All of the actual debates he's done are quite old (at least the ones on Youtube). 

[Leo Gura]

@Markus It's rather funny because he takes these very nuanced, rather academic philosophical positions which are very easy to misinterpret and lead to huge amounts of controversy, which then gives him an opportunity to use his hyper-rational mental abilities to navigate around all the controversy and dispel much of the misunderstanding, but this takes hours of back-and-forth, and polarizes many people -- who either love him or hate him.

Controversy is certainly an effective marketing strategy. Not sure if it's efficient at raising consciousness in those people who get polarized.

For example, I'm not sure he's helping rid the world of Islamic fanaticism by bashing Islam and theism all the time. But that's just my opinion. He's certainly free to philosophize away.

Personally, I think the best way to rid the world of fanaticism of all stripes is by discouraging people from debate, instead having them turn inward to deeply examine their desires to debate, rationalize, and take positions.

By taking strong polemical positions and engaging in constant criticism, one subconsciously communicates the values which fuel fanaticism and sectarianism all over the world.

In other words, in the face of hate, apply love, not more hate.

My teaching style used to be more polarizing. I've been learning my lesson though and have had to move away from that style as my own consciousness rises. I don't see polarized teachings as being sustainable at the highest levels of consciousness. Because they are fundamentally dualistc. It's sorta sad for me to give up my old polarizing style. My ego likes it. It's way more fun to bash people. Oh well... another blow to the old ego I guess.

The trick with highly conscious people, is that they are SO FUCKING LOVING, you cannot believe it when you see it. From the surface it appears fake or impossible. Because of that, many ordinary folks get turned off by it because it feels too sappy and lovey-dovey. It's like high consciousness has to dumb itself down to resonate with low consciousness. But high consciousness also doesn't care to dumb itself down. Which results in nonduality remaining a niche field.

The paradox of consciousness: you have to possess consciousness to want to pursue consciousness.

[Hunter Arrington]

39 minutes ago, AxelK said:

@Leo Gura Exactly. Which is why i think its unfair to disregard him as your typical scientist. I think he has all the information and the view of the world similar to nonduality,  i just dont think he's made the connection yet.

No one is off the hook in terms of egoic arguing. NO ONE

[AlwaysBeNice]

Good shit Leo

[Leo Gura]

@John Flores The number of people killed by rationalism may far outnumber the number killed by Islamic fundamentalism.

Don't forget who created nukes and who is most likely to deploy them (Hint: not Islamic fundamentalists).

If the entire world is destroyed, it will be because of rationalism and stage Orange consciousness, not stage Blue and much less stage Red consciousness.

On the list of world problems, terrorism doesn't even make the top 20.

[Leo Gura]

Religious fanatics and atheists have much more in common than religious fanatics and mystics. This is what atheists aren't conscious of.

Atheists are clearly dogmatic and stuck in their minds.

[Guest username]

@Leo Gura Do you still stand by the fact that enlightenment leads to Absolute Truth? In your most recent video, it sounds like that claim would be inconsistent with your approach to epistemology. 

[Leo Gura]

@username Absolute Truth -- if it exists -- is SO beyond claims or words, that it's best to not even speak of it.

My approach to epistemology is totally open. Which means one doesn't know if Absolute Truth is accessible or not. At least not until one's accessed it. At which point, you'll have to make a determination.

From a position of being outside Absolute Truth, it's not possible to know how you'll feel about Absolute Truth once you're inside it. And whether it's truly Absolute or not.

It's sorta like you're asking what's inside a black hole. Well, you'll never know unless you enter it. You don't even know whether it's possible to enter it. But if you ever succeed in entering it -- by means you can't presently imagine -- you'll know. But you'll never be able to tell anyone what you saw.

At least that's if you believe me. The reality for you, is that you don't even know if what I'm telling you is true.

So now you're left with the choice of whether you want to risk seeking out the black hole, or stay on your comfy couch.

What if you spend all these years chasing down this black hole, you finally figure out a way to go inside, and all you see is nothing. Wouldn't that be a trip!

[Guest username]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

@username Absolute Truth -- if it exists -- is SO beyond claims or words, that it's best to not even speak of it.

My approach to epistemology is totally open. Which means one doesn't know if Absolute Truth is accessible or not. At least not until one's accessed it. At which point, you'll have to make a determination.

From a position of being outside Absolute Truth, it's not possible to know how you'll feel about Absolute Truth once you're inside it. And whether it's truly Absolute or not.

It's sorta like you're asking what's inside a black hole. Well, you'll never know unless you enter it. You don't even know whether it's possible to enter it. But if you ever succeed in entering it -- by means you can't presently imagine -- you'll know. But you'll never be able to tell anyone what you saw.

At least that's if you believe me. The reality for you, is that you don't even know if what I'm telling you is true.

So now you're left with the choice of whether you want to risk seeking out the black hole, or stay on your comfy couch.

What if you spend all these years chasing down this black hole, you finally figure out a way to go inside, and all you see is nothing. Wouldn't that be a trip!

I'm going to do it anyway, even if I don't know if it's worthwhile. My old xp grinding habits from rpgs demand it in the consciousness work realm.  

[WaveInTheOcean]

In regards to Truth... I mean...One shouldn't seek enlightenment just based on hearsay about how it is to be enlightened. One should seek enlightenment because of DESIRE for Truth - whatever that Truth might be. When one is seeking, ones doesn't know the Truth. So you're searching without knowning what ya'll get. Yet you do it anyway, ONLY because you have an inner desire to FIND out what is true about your basic reality and what is not true.

Edited January 23, 2017 by WaveInTheOcean

[cetus]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

What if you spend all these years chasing down this black hole, you finally figure out a way to go inside, and all you see is nothing. Wouldn't that be a trip!

@Leo Gura You may have just described Absolute Truth to a T. There is none. No right, no wrong, no this, no that. The perfection of absolute emptiness makes the search for any truth seem like being lost in a self imposed wilderness.

@username You see, this so called search for truth is named that for a very good reason. It gives the ego something to do until enlightenment happens. Can you find bliss in maybe never knowing what is Absolute Truth? That there may be none outside of mind? Not so easy is it.

 

[Guest username]

50 minutes ago, WaveInTheOcean said:

In regards to Truth... I mean...One shouldn't seek enlightenment just based on hearsay about how it is to be enlightened. One should seek enlightenment because of DESIRE for Truth - whatever that Truth might be. When one is seeking, ones doesn't know the Truth. So you're searching without knowning what ya'll get. Yet you do it anyway, ONLY because you have an inner desire to FIND out what is true about your basic reality and what is not true.

My sentiments exactly.

 

 

@cetus56  Yeah, really hard. It's led to some of my darkest moments, but it's worth while I'd say.

[cetus]

4 minutes ago, username said:

@cetus56  Yeah, really hard. It's led to some of my darkest moments, but it's worth while I'd say.

@username Maybe this is actually your brightest moments.

[cetus]

2 hours ago, John Flores said:

@Leo Gura To see nothing is to be nothing and therefore to be all that there is, which includes the whole of existence - be it the cosmos, stardust, atoms, and cells. It's to be every form of conciousness there is through all of existence.

 

To discover nothing, is to discover orgasm - it's to discover everything. Not everyone is ready for that. There is too much duality in their hearts and mind - myself included to experience that all at once.

@John Flores You are 100% correct. I was just reminded of this in meditation in a huge way. A porthole of sorts to the infinite opened up within awareness and I totally choked. It was absolute nothingness. It looked like darkness within darkness from my ego's perspective. Man was that empty! The mind totally  refuses to accept that level of emptiness.  And I just got a glimpse from the outside and that shocked me instantly back into myself and it was gone in the blink of an eye.

I see one thing clearly now. Anybody who can willingly let go of the ego and voluntarily step over that threshold to face that level of emptiness that awaits deserves to be called enlightened.

People could read and study enlightenment and learn all there is to know about it and talk about it all they want, but when it really comes down to getting there it's all about faith in something way bigger than you. Only total surrender of self and nothing else will help you than.  In the face of that your totally on your own. Either you surrender everything that is you or the journey ends right there and you remain as you are.

So bottom line, when infinity presented itself, I totally choked by holding on to myself in the face of becoming nothing, and therefore everything.

I guess I wasn't ready for that!

 

[Guest username]

@cetus56 What's your meditation practice like? I still haven't had anything that powerful.

Edited January 23, 2017 by username

[cetus]

@username I was listening to an Om video w/headphones/ eyes closed and placed awareness on the emptiness between thoughts. I think the direct focus on emptiness between the thoughts did it. That was something added to the practice just today so it's to early to really tell yet. And I could do the same practice 100 times and it may not happen again. It really is a hit or miss thing like the universe suddenly opens up to you. These precious opportunities only present themselves every so often so don't go thinking you can control it. Your chance to move beyond yourself will come. No doubt about it. Be ready to let go when it does!

 

[ChimpBrain]

I listened to this yesterday. I'm a fan of both guys, although I only discovered Peterson a few months ago. I had high hopes for this conversation but it was a let down for me personally. I really hope they do the second interview and touch on some topics people actually want to hear discussed. I'm not well versed enough in philosophy to appreciate this debate I guess. I do know that Harris made far more sense to me than Peterson did. Especially in his follow up blog post about it. I still really dig Peterson's lectures on Youtube and Self-Authoring course though even if his idea of Truth is wonky lol.

 

Here's Sam's follow up https://www.samharris.org/blog/item/speaking-of-truth-with-jordan-b.-peterson?utm_source=Main+List&utm_campaign=c06b1a1d17-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_01_23&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_f1c2a2c9db-c06b1a1d17-207210237&mc_cid=c06b1a1d17&mc_eid=53d28eba7c

Edited January 24, 2017 by ChimpBrain

[Arman]

Sam Harris is like WWE for people who outgrew (or suppressed) their love of muscles and spandex. 

Edited January 24, 2017 by Arman

[Key Elements]

On 23/01/2017 at 1:52 PM, Leo Gura said:

It's sorta like you're asking what's inside a black hole. Well, you'll never know unless you enter it. You don't even know whether it's possible to enter it. But if you ever succeed in entering it -- by means you can't presently imagine -- you'll know. But you'll never be able to tell anyone what you saw.

I really like your wording here - how you put it. Did you ride the ox backwards? (You don't have to answer it - just a reference question.)

Edited January 25, 2017 by Key Elements

[LateBloomer]

@Leo Gura

On 22.1.2017 at 8:11 AM, Leo Gura said:

@SelfPeace I have imagined offering him 30mg of 5-meo. I would even help him take it and film his reaction.

But I doubt he'd be open to it. And I certainly don't want to debate over it as a hypothetical.

I'm not a fan of the academic style of philosophy. It lacks soul. But good luck convincing it of that on logical grounds.

@Leo Gura Wow that would be something! You should definitely contact Sam and make an offer. Decent chance he'd take it I think. He's done some psychedelics before, practices meditation etc.