Metaphysical Repression

[Nick_A]

Building on the “what does it mean to become human” thread, this rhread focuses on what prevents it. Why do people defend cave life with such a passion? Why the increasing effect of the Woke influence giving the impression that once American values are destroyed, the way is open for social justice?

IMO American and universal metaphysical values are denied by socially encouraged metaphysical repression within media, education, and philosophy. Jacob Needleman describes his experience with metaphysical repression:

https://www.conversations.org/story.php?sid=1

I remember I was a freshman at Harvard, in one of my first philosophy classes there. The professor started by asking—like I do sometimes, like professors do—what do you expect to get out of philosophy? I put up my hand and said, "I want to know why I'm living, why we die. Does God exist? What are we here for?" I went on an on like that, and I could see around me that there was this silence. My throat got dry, and I just felt awful. At first I'd thought that I was going to speak for the whole human race. And the professor, of course, was saying, "Yes. Go on." He knew he had one. Finally I just couldn't go on any more. Then he said, "Yes. But you see, that's not philosophy. If you want to know those things, you have to see a psychiatrist or a priest. This is not philosophy." It was such a shock.

I recovered quite well, but I had to find a few other people who shared my hunger. It is the hunger you're speaking of. That is what Plato called eros—a word that's come down to us which has taken on a sexual association. But for Plato it had to do, in part, with a striving that is innate in us, a striving to participate with one's mind, one's consciousness, in something greater than oneself. A love of wisdom, if you like, a love of being.

Eros is depicted in Plato's text, The Symposium, as half man, half god, a kind of intermediate force between the gods and mortals. It is a very interesting idea. Eros is what gives birth to philosophy. Modern philosophy often translates the word "wonder" merely as "curiosity," the desire to figure things out, or to intellectually solve problems rather than confronting the depth of these questions, pondering, reflecting, being humbled by them. In this way, philosophy becomes an exercise in meaningless ingenuity.

I did learn to play that game, and then to avoid it.

My students at SF State were very hungry for what most of us, down deeply, really want from philosophy. When we honor those unanswerable questions and open them and deepen them, students are very happy about it, very interested in a deep quiet way.

RW: It is really very hard to find that, I believe.

JN: Some years ago I had a chance to teach a course in philosophy in high school. I got ten or twelve very gifted kids at this wonderful school, San Francisco University High School. In that first class I said, "Now just imagine, as if this was a fairy tale, imagine you are in front of the wisest person in the world, not me, but the wisest person there is and you can only ask one question. What would you ask?" At first they giggled and then they saw that I was very serious. So then they started writing. What came back was astonishing to me. I couldn't understand it at first. About half of the things that came back had little handwriting at the bottom or the sides of the paper in the margin. Questions like, Why do we live? Why do we die? What is the brain for? Questions of the heart. But they were written in the margins as though they were saying, do we really have permission to express these questions? We're not going to be laughed at? It was as though this was something that had been repressed.

RW: Fascinating.

JN: It's what I call metaphysical repression. It's in our culture and It's much worse than sexual repression. It represses eros and I think that maybe that's where art can be of help sometimes. Some art………..

Secularism prefers arguing

Modern philosophy involves itself with meaningless ingenuity while secularism has the impossible goal of social justice. Both avoid the questions of the heart and the contemplation of what we ARE so repress eros. The love of wisdom the essence of philosophy are canceled in favor of indoctrinating the young into the impossible goal of changing the world resulting in tyranny.

The questions of the heart are repressed and the young are afraid to admit that they feel these questions as opposed to the usual indoctrination into social values.

What of the minority who feel the psychological harm being done on the young by metaphysical repression? What can they do to offer alternatives in a world that doesn't want it. what could provide the awakening impressions of what it means to become human before they are canceled by wokeism into oblivion?

[Papus79]

There was a discussion / debate a while back between Rebecca Goldstein, Jordan Peterson, and William Lane Craig, and Rebecca Goldstein brought up why things are the way they are - ie. secularists of her sort associate meaning with swastikas, concentration camps, and gas chambers. It's a bit like the moment people start feeling reverent it's too close to feeling patriotic, and either emotion leads to mass murder.

You can probably tell that I didn't do much to steel-man that view, and if so it's probably because I think oversimplifies both reverence to larger/higher things and equally deflates our need for it or the problems caused by lack of it in a particularly partisan manner.

[chewybrian]

I think existential philosophy and existential therapy have a lot to say about this. We run from reality because we fear it, we don't understand it, it makes us sad, or it causes us to see that we are really alone in the deepest sense. For emotional reasons, we often decide that this is not the way we would like reality to be, or that we "deserve" something else. So, we create a version of reality where we are all in it together (at least within our own tribe), where there are "fair" rules that make sense, where we can live forever in some sense or another, through accomplishments, by helping to build a great society, through our family, or in heaven.

Existential therapy groups these concerns as: freedom, death, meaninglessness and isolation. If you can face up to each of these, you may decide that you have some answers of your own, though they amount to opinion. Terrific responsibility for our choices goes hand in hand with freedom. Death limits the possible scope of our actions. Without a hard anchor of meaning, we will never know if we are doing the right thing, or if it will have any positive effects upon the world or others, even if we try. We are intellectually isolated, and importing values and ideas is a copout. We are still responsible for our own ideas and choices, even if we act in accordance with the bible, the legal code, or social customs.

Looking at these ideas now, with an open mind, I don't find them frightening. They are simply a best guess stab at the truth, and there is little percentage in fearing or denying the truth. The closer to the truth you are, the better armed you are to make good decisions.

In that first class I said, "Now just imagine, as if this was a fairy tale, imagine you are in front of the wisest person in the world, not me, but the wisest person there is and you can only ask one question. What would you ask?"

[Nick_A]

Chewybrian

I think existential philosophy and existential therapy have a lot to say about this. We run from reality because we fear it, we don't understand it, it makes us sad, or it causes us to see that we are really alone in the deepest sense. For emotional reasons, we often decide that this is not the way we would like reality to be, or that we "deserve" something else. So, we create a version of reality where we are all in it together (at least within our own tribe), where there are "fair" rules that make sense, where we can live forever in some sense or another, through accomplishments, by helping to build a great society, through our family, or in heaven.

Is it really the fear of being alone or the absence of the feeling of objective meaning? If the young feel this loss, escape into materialism is the easiest way to avoid these feelings. Isn't that what is happening now? Materialism is the result of the loss of the ability to contemplate ideas of a certain qualty

I remember reading once where Simone Weil described the human organism as like a green plant. Good soil is necessary for the plant to develop through its roots as is a healthy society for a person. Spiritual light nourishes the inner man as the sun nourishes the leaves of the plant.

Chlorophyll's job in a plant is to absorb light—usually sunlight. The energy absorbed from light is transferred to two kinds of energy-storing molecules. Through photosynthesis, the plant uses the stored energy to convert carbon dioxide (absorbed from the air) and water into glucose, a type of sugar.

Ideas of certain quality are essential for a person to develop as nature intended. When society denies contemplating them, what is more natural than turning to materialism to take its place. My concern is for the young who feel it but are powerless to contend with a world that wants it.

Here is a list of ten questions from the heart which can be contemplated rather than argued. Who can help them to develop human understanding through contemplation?

http://www.jacobneedleman.com/blog/2016 ... -the-heart

1. Are we alone in the Universe? (Does God Exist?)

2. Who am I?

3. Why do we live?

4. Why do we suffer?

5. Is death the end?

6. Why is there evil?

7. What can we hope for?

8. What can we know?

9. What ought we to do?

10. How should we live?

Rather than killing the questions, who can nourish and intensify them in a respectful way so a person can feel the joy of trying to understand them and their value rather than condemning and ridiculing them. If we cannot, I fear society will sink further into materialism and finally the violent struggle for power which will be catastrophic.

[CalebB]

Rather than killing the questions, who can nourish and intensify them in a respectful way so a person can feel the joy of trying to understand them and their value rather than condemning and ridiculing them. If we cannot, I fear society will sink further into materialism and finally the violent struggle for power which will be catastrophic.

With so much deception and influential powers taking advantage of people for monetary gains, where do the young turn for obtaining true answers to these types of questions. I think young people need to be trained in critical thinking skills so that they would be confident in their ability to search for knowledge for themselves. Organizations want to feed people certain beliefs, religious leaders want to spread other beliefs. To find truth becomes a daunting task and who do you trust with your enlightenment?
It starts to feel safer to go with the rest of society and embrace what most believe to be "proven science". Fortunately with access to the internet young people have a much better opportunity to gain knowledge of various subjects today than in the past. If one knows its okay to question the norms of culture and tradition when it comes to moral/existential questions, one can move forward.

[Nick_A]

Rather than killing the questions, who can nourish and intensify them in a respectful way so a person can feel the joy of trying to understand them and their value rather than condemning and ridiculing them. If we cannot, I fear society will sink further into materialism and finally the violent struggle for power which will be catastrophic.

With so much deception and influential powers taking advantage of people for monetary gains, where do the young turn for obtaining true answers to these types of questions. I think young people need to be trained in critical thinking skills so that they would be confident in their ability to search for knowledge for themselves. Organizations want to feed people certain beliefs, religious leaders want to spread other beliefs. To find truth becomes a daunting task and who do you trust with your enlightenment?
It starts to feel safer to go with the rest of society and embrace what most believe to be "proven science". Fortunately with access to the internet young people have a much better opportunity to gain knowledge of various subjects today than in the past. If one knows its okay to question the norms of culture and tradition when it comes to moral/existential questions, one can move forward.

Hi Caleb

Critical thinking is good for learning objective facts but is useless to feel objective values. The questions of the heart refer to the inner need in the depth of ones being for values. That is why Socrates said "I know nothing" and was considered the wisest man in all of Athens. He knew facts but couldn't feel objective values. Those around him had adopted subjective values but Socrates was wise enough to realize he knew nothing about objective values essential to finally feel objective human meaning.

Obsessing with facts at the expense of meaning has led to the lessening of the attention span in so many which society encourages.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... dy-reveals

This article is more than 2 years old
Global attention span is narrowing and trends don't last as long, study reveals
This article is more than 2 years old
Research combed from everything from movie tickets to social media finds more to focus on but less time to do so

It’s just as you suspected; the information age has changed the general attention span. A recently published study from researchers at the Technical University of Denmark suggests the collective global attention span is narrowing due to the amount of information that is presented to the public. Released on Monday in the scientific journal Nature Communications, the study shows people now have more things to focus on – but often focus on things for short periods of time.

If the information age and critical thinking has revealed more facts but at the expense of experiencing a human perspective to place them in, what is more natural than a catastrophic result?

Humanity needs those who remember what a human perspective is and allow the young to remember and feel it as well. But where do we find such people? Surely not in the media, politics, and education.

[CalebB]

Critical thinking is good for learning objective facts but is useless to feel objective values. The questions of the heart refer to the inner need in the depth of ones being for values. That is why Socrates said "I know nothing" and was considered the wisest man in all of Athens. He knew facts but couldn't feel objective values. Those around him had adopted subjective values but Socrates was wise enough to realize he knew nothing about objective values essential to finally feel objective human meaning.

I understand that objective values and morality has to be felt deep inside. It is more of an acquaintance knowledge than factual knowledge, but why does someone believe in the values that they have? Is it because their parents taught them from childhood, or is it part of their culture, or written in holy scripture? Another person might hold to certain values because they know that those values would lead to the well-being of themselves and everyone around them.

I get the meaning from the quote from Socrates. I think that is why meditation and living in the moment is so important. People have become reliant on objective facts, and have become less aware of themselves, their feelings, and the world around them. Cats are really good at being cats. Dogs know exactly how to be dogs. Do humans know how to BE humans?

Critical thinking is still needed to filter through the objective values that are presented to us. Otherwise we might end up believing that we will have many virgins in heaven if we blow ourselves up in a crowded park.

[Pattern-chaser]

...metaphysical values are denied by socially encouraged metaphysical repression within media, education, and philosophy.

I've never heard it given a name before - "metaphysical repression" - but this has been going on for some time. I don't know how many layers this particular onion might have, but here is one of them.

Analytic philosophers - and their bed-mates Objectivists, Sciencists and Certaintists - prefer science over all other tools that can be used to help us understand life, the universe, and everything. As part of this mindset, problems that science cannot address are dismissed as incomplete or nonsensical. In short: if science cannot deal adequately with it, it isn't a problem, it's just nonsense. Thus science can and does deal with all problems.

This leaves the so-called 'metaphysical' problems. The problems that often come without evidence, or for which evidence cannot be obtained. These are questions to which we deeply desire answers, even when conclusions are difficult to reach. For many reasons, we need answers to these questions. And so we guess, of course, as we always have done.

Sometimes this guesswork is only wishful thinking. But these issues can be investigated a little more rigorously. So we fall back on structured, considered, thought. It's what we had before we developed science, and it's what we used to develop science in the first place. I think it's called "philosophy".

Your OP also mentions the sorts of questions we would like to be able to answer, and they're the interesting ones. Is there a God? What is the purpose of life? And so on. The movement you call "metaphysical repression" exists to demean such questions, apparently for 'political' reasons. This attitude is unscientific and unphilosophical too. And it keeps us away from the really interesting questions, and the highly profitable cogitations they often stimulate. It, and the sciencists too, should simply be ignored, IMO.

[Pattern-chaser]

It starts to feel safer to go with the rest of society and embrace what most believe to be "proven science".

The questions being considered here are outside science. That's rather the point. These questions are speculative, they lack evidence, and they lack even the possibility that evidence could be obtained in the future. Science cannot address these issues. This is not a failure of science, or of life, the universe and everything; it just is.

[Pattern-chaser]

Critical thinking is good for learning objective facts but is useless to feel objective values. The questions of the heart refer to the inner need in the depth of ones being for values. That is why Socrates said "I know nothing" and was considered the wisest man in all of Athens. He knew facts but couldn't feel objective values. Those around him had adopted subjective values but Socrates was wise enough to realize he knew nothing about objective values essential to finally feel objective human meaning.

Oh, please, not the O-word! It brings with it only confusion. If you remove it from your words above, they make more and clearer sense. With the O-word present, your topic is derailed. Subsidiary questions emerge, like "Is he talking about values that are certain, and shared universally?" or "Does he mean to imply that meaning is intrinsic to the 'real' world?" And so on. Where did metaphysical repression go?

[Nick_A]

Critical thinking is good for learning objective facts but is useless to feel objective values. The questions of the heart refer to the inner need in the depth of ones being for values. That is why Socrates said "I know nothing" and was considered the wisest man in all of Athens. He knew facts but couldn't feel objective values. Those around him had adopted subjective values but Socrates was wise enough to realize he knew nothing about objective values essential to finally feel objective human meaning

I understand that objective values and morality has to be felt deep inside. It is more of an acquaintance knowledge than factual knowledge, but why does someone believe in the values that they have? Is it because their parents taught them from childhood, or is it part of their culture, or written in holy scripture? Another person might hold to certain values because they know that those values would lead to the well-being of themselves and everyone around them.

I get the meaning from the quote from Socrates. I think that is why meditation and living in the moment is so important. People have become reliant on objective facts, and have become less aware of themselves, their feelings, and the world around them. Cats are really good at being cats. Dogs know exactly how to be dogs. Do humans know how to BE humans?

Critical thinking is still needed to filter through the objective values that are presented to us. Otherwise we might end up believing that we will have many virgins in heaven if we blow ourselves up in a crowded park.

You've touched on the important difference between indoctrinated morality and objective conscience. Where objective conscience is remembered as universal truths, morality is indoctrinated by parents and society. Plato explains

"If men learn this, it will implant forgetfulness in their souls; they will cease to exercise memory because they rely on that which is written, calling things to remembrance no longer from within themselves, but by means of external marks. What you have discovered is a recipe not for memory, but for reminder. And it is no true wisdom that you offer your disciples, but only its semblance, for by telling them of many things without teaching them you will make them seem to know much, while for the most part they know nothing, and as men filled, not with wisdom, but with the conceit of wisdom, they will be a burden to their fellows." ― Plato, Phaedrus

Conscience has been atrophied in most due to lack of use. Initially the results of conscience were remembered. Soon after they were interpreted and devolved into indoctrinated morality. Conscience is really the third dimension of thought which gives objective value to the duality of facts.

1948
"One never goes wrong following his feeling. I don’t mean emotions, I mean feeling, for feeling and intuition are one.” Albert Einstein, in Einstein and the Poet – In Search of the Cosmic Man by William Hermanns (Branden Press, 1983, p. 95. – conversation on September 14, 1948)

Morality is learned conditioned values while conscience or feelings are qualities of objective values we are born with and can be remembered. The problem is that the world rejects conscience and insists on conditioned morality provided by the world as with this recent obsession with being woke for example.

"We must make the individual man aware of his conscience so that he understands what it means that only a few will survive the next war. This man will be the cosmic man." Albert Einstein, in Einstein and the Poet – In Search of the Cosmic Man by William Hermanns (Branden Press, 1983, p. 99.)

The cosmic man is Man's potential future. It would mean Man evolving from a seed trapped in the darkness of Plato's Cave into the light and maturity. Society wants the security of Plato's cave so devalues the great ideas which make remembering what we ARE possible. The young feel and suffer the effects through metaphysical repression. Is it that surprising that they turn to drugs?

[Nick_A]

Critical thinking is good for learning objective facts but is useless to feel objective values. The questions of the heart refer to the inner need in the depth of ones being for values. That is why Socrates said "I know nothing" and was considered the wisest man in all of Athens. He knew facts but couldn't feel objective values. Those around him had adopted subjective values but Socrates was wise enough to realize he knew nothing about objective values essential to finally feel objective human meaning.

Oh, please, not the O-word! It brings with it only confusion. If you remove it from your words above, they make more and clearer sense. With the O-word present, your topic is derailed. Subsidiary questions emerge, like "Is he talking about values that are certain, and shared universally?" or "Does he mean to imply that meaning is intrinsic to the 'real' world?" And so on. Where did metaphysical repression go?

Objective truths or the domain of Plato's forms are only possible for the Cosmic Man. As we are, we are limited to opposing subjective values. You wish to avoid the O word and repress it. Others want to intensify the need to experience it since they sense the need to inwardly become themselves.

[Pattern-chaser]

Critical thinking is good for learning objective facts but is useless to feel objective values. The questions of the heart refer to the inner need in the depth of ones being for values. That is why Socrates said "I know nothing" and was considered the wisest man in all of Athens. He knew facts but couldn't feel objective values. Those around him had adopted subjective values but Socrates was wise enough to realize he knew nothing about objective values essential to finally feel objective human meaning.

Oh, please, not the O-word! It brings with it only confusion. If you remove it from your words above, they make more and clearer sense. With the O-word present, your topic is derailed. Subsidiary questions emerge, like "Is he talking about values that are certain, and shared universally?" or "Does he mean to imply that meaning is intrinsic to the 'real' world?" And so on. Where did metaphysical repression go?

Objective truths or the domain of Plato's forms are only possible for the Cosmic Man. As we are, we are limited to opposing subjective values. You wish to avoid the O word and repress it. Others want to intensify the need to experience it since they sense the need to inwardly become themselves.

Hmm. OK. Consider this: objectivity is anathema to the questions that this topic urges us to consider. These topics feature few facts, if any, and little evidence, if any. Objective consideration of these questions is quite impossible, no matter which of its many senses you intend the word to carry.

[Pattern-chaser]

P.S.

You wish to avoid the O word and repress it.

I seek to repress nothing. I only wish to maximise clarity, and "objective" is one of the biggest obstacles to clarity in a philosophy forum. Every sense it can carry can be expressed more clearly and concisely using other words, I feel.

[Nick_A]

Critical thinking is good for learning objective facts but is useless to feel objective values. The questions of the heart refer to the inner need in the depth of ones being for values. That is why Socrates said "I know nothing" and was considered the wisest man in all of Athens. He knew facts but couldn't feel objective values. Those around him had adopted subjective values but Socrates was wise enough to realize he knew nothing about objective values essential to finally feel objective human meaning.

Oh, please, not the O-word! It brings with it only confusion. If you remove it from your words above, they make more and clearer sense. With the O-word present, your topic is derailed. Subsidiary questions emerge, like "Is he talking about values that are certain, and shared universally?" or "Does he mean to imply that meaning is intrinsic to the 'real' world?" And so on. Where did metaphysical repression go?

Objective truths or the domain of Plato's forms are only possible for the Cosmic Man. As we are, we are limited to opposing subjective values. You wish to avoid the O word and repress it. Others want to intensify the need to experience it since they sense the need to inwardly become themselves.

Hmm. OK. Consider this: objectivity is anathema to the questions that this topic urges us to consider. These topics feature few facts, if any, and little evidence, if any. Objective consideration of these questions is quite impossible, no matter which of its many senses you intend the word to carry.

Of course objectivity is "anathema" to the joy of arguing fragmentation. That is why Jesus and Socrates had to be killed and why the need to experience objective truths must be repressed. But if the purpose of philosophy is to awaken people to the potential for leaving Plato's cave it must include the potential to move from arguing partial truths into noesis by conscious contemplation.

."Attention is the rarest and purest form of generosity. It is given to very few minds to notice that things and beings exist. Since my childhood I have not wanted anything else but to receive the complete revelation of this before dying." ~Simone Weil

The diminished attention span leading to metaphysical repression is the primary reason why the young are so easily drawn to fantasy to protect themselves from the loss. But it is through mastering sustaining conscious attention that it becomes possible to leave Plato's cave and the attractions of fragmentation into the direction of freedom, objectivity, and wholeness the depths of our being are searching for.