I had a hunch this thread would be revived after the election.

Right from the get-go, you encouraged me with a quick and easy 'How to...' think as I read and then comment accordingly. That helped me enormously to get into the flow. — Amity

:flower: Glad to know it helped.

Not sure how things stand for any event this December? My questions remain unanswered...guess nobody cares much :chin: — Amity

There was talk of doing it this December. I'm not sure if I'll be able to help or not but I'm hoping it will happen. I have a story written already for once. :chin:

Thanks y'all. Forgot about those. Nice poem, Baden. I'm about to go to bed but will read this thread soon (hopefully).

Your post I quoted is a belief of yours. Is it subject to its own rules?

First off, it's good to see you step out from the Shoutbox and toss us some meat to chew on. — T Clark

Thanks, and thanks for the reply. I'm not sure how much of it I'll get to.

So, can you have a belief that is not expressed in words? — T Clark

What I'm trying to get at is that what I'm calling "core beliefs" seem to exist in a pre-linguistic way. That's what I'm getting at with the idea of a "linguistic quantum world". It's admittedly a sloppy metaphor. I think there are layers to belief, and if you continue to strip them back, things do indeed get murky until you uncover something pretty raw in the core of your being. It's such a deeply private and personal concept that I literally cannot even attempt to describe with language what's there or what it is because it's most likely different for every person, and it's a place to which many people seem unwilling to go. Is this philosophy? I don't know.

So what I believe about myself does indeed create my world.
— Noble Dust
That belief ... merely is your ego – masking oneself (i.e. being-in-the-world) – an 'illusory separation' from the world (i.e. disembodiment fantasy). A psycho-sociological fiction. — 180 Proof

And what about this belief of yours?

I've also read Beyond Belief and The Gnostic Gospels by Pagels. I think she's a bit more engaging of a writer than Armstrong. Additional books that were helpful for me, @Tom Storm.

I think a distinction should be made between types of beliefs. The beliefs you're using as examples here are context-dependent and directly related to the world around us. What I'm trying to get at is fundamental belief, the beliefs that are the foundation of how each of us perceives and experiences the world. These are often not apparent to us (maybe more apparent to those of us who post on philosophy forums, true). They're beliefs about the self.

What do I believe about myself? untangling this question requires a lot of rigorous work and honesty. I am the window through which I experience the world; I am fundamental to the world I experience. So what I believe about myself does indeed create my world. These beliefs are more primary than even philosophical or religious beliefs; they underly them. One's philosophical positions are ultimately expressions of one's beliefs about oneself. Philosophical or religious beliefs are beliefs about the world, but beliefs about myself are the foundation on which these other beliefs are built. This is the sense in which I'm speaking when I say belief is reality. To be fair, it's a bit of a dramatic thing to say, maybe a bit of performance art. My fundamental beliefs about myself shape my reality. That could be another way of saying it.

Her book The Battle For God was helpful in understanding how the persecution of the early church by the Roman Empire was an important factor in the early church fathers creating a biblical cannon and a general sense of orthodoxy. The concept of the inerrancy of scripture was a huge part of my upbringing and an early turning point for me in the process of leaving religion. Understanding the history of the concept gave me context and helped me detach myself from that indoctrination.

I think you mean Karen Armstrong's, A History fo God. — Tom Storm

:up: Reading this and other books of hers has helped me in deconstructing my fundamentalist evangelical Christian upbringing. Definitely recommend this and others of hers to the OP.

The two big finds I've found recently are "The Place of the Lion" and "Out of the Silent Planet." — Count Timothy von Icarus

I've read both. Charles Williams is a bizarre character; my favorites of his novels are Descent Into Hell and The Greater Trumps. They all have a similar flavor though. But if you enjoyed The Place Of The Lion, I'd recommend those two.

I first read Out Of The Silent Planet as a kid, so it has a special place in my heart. It's kind of a blatant ripoff of A Voyage To Arcturus by David Lindsay, which I'm pretty sure Lewis freely admitted. Where Linday's novel is almost Gnostic in it's philosophy, Lewis I think deliberately took a similar story structure and replaced the arcane and "blasphemous" elements with something more palatable and Christian. Anyway, I do love both novels, but Arcturus is the more memorable to me because of it's bizarre otherworldliness. The writing is terrible, but it's utterly unforgettable. Also recommended. Lindsay has a few other very weird and terribly written novels that will either leave you cold or get you fiendishly obsessed for awhile (the latter happened to me).

The Upanishads
Dune - Frank Herbert

Cheers, glad you enjoyed.

Nice. That's a weird one!

You might like this. Ambient by way of spiritual jazz.

I'd suggest you're asking the wrong people by posting here.

Classic. I'm not convinced Elizabeth Fraser is human.

This is one of my favorites, from their oft-maligned final album.



I've really been leaning into sort of pre-post-rock (?) music from the early 90's. This band sounds fresh to me.

Interesting. How do you like it?

Seth Speaks - Jane Roberts

Don't judge me...

Nice, Tim Hecker is classic.

I'd say "Video Unavailable" isn't an understatement or an overstatement; seems pretty accurate.

I heard this years ago at a friend's house in Chicago. I was weirded out at the time as I don't usually like spoken word, but it's haunted me ever since, and tonight another friend posted it on instagram. Mystery solved, and now I'm bewitched.

My chicken usually lasts for day of cooking + 3 days. — Lionino

Pretty much exactly that.

Meal prep this week for dinner was chicken shawarma (marinated and cooked stovetop), a Turkish white bean salad recipe with tomato, parsley and lots of red onion, olive oil and red wine vinegar, garlic and sumac, pita bread and some amazing hummus from my favorite Syrian bakery. I've tried making hummus and it's never been smooth enough. I was going to make saffron rice but ran out of time, so bought some generic pita instead. Still a good, healthy Mediterranean meal.

Nice, yeah, they're definitely music nerd albums. I like the transitional nature of Colour of Spring, sort of like Rubber Soul for The Beatles. Do you know Bark Psychosis I posted above? That track is more Talk Talk-ish, but I also like this track for a more post-rock vibe. Their first record Hex is considered a seminal post rock album.

Worth checking out I think. Then there's Bark Psychosis, a seminal post rock band where Lee Harris played drums on their second album. Definitely some strong Talk Talk vibes:

I haven't listened to any of it in a long time. I still love Spirit of Eden and The Colour of Spring as well. Do you know O.rang ? Basically Talk Talk sans Mark Hollis (Lee Harris and Paul Webb). The first album is more Talk Talk-ish, but I like this EP:

I need to revisit that record. I'm sure we've discussed Talk Talk. Laughing Stock is my favorite album of all time.

With classical in general I'm more focused on solo piano music, which a sizable portion of Ravel's small ouvre is made up of, so I'll recommend a few. @Tom Storm did you ever get into Ravel's solo piano stuff? It's his best work to me, although he was also known as a master orchestrator. His piano music sounds effortlessly pianistic, but is impossible and awkward to play. A sign that he's the master.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIBOwg8NGmA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnTmtjO6IKI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvVSEoyoj9Q

Yes, that's what I'm saying.

Ever been working on something passionately and experienced a time warp via tons of productivity? That is the artist's method. — Vaskane

This often happens. But equally, in the style of Radiohead, intense scrutiny and slow, slogging technical adjustment results in similar feelings of achievement toward the end product. — AmadeusD

Yes, both are valid approaches and I think most artists probably engage in both to varying percentages. It's seems like a trite quote, but I've always loved this which is attributed to Picasso: "Inspiration exists, but it has to find you working." So, those flow states don't require discipline, and you can certainly find yourself in one and make something. But if you are disciplined in showing up to the drawing board, the flow states will come more often and you'll be more productive. Says the artist who hasn't shown up daily to do the work in years.

I also think as I get older, I'm developing more respect for the slow methodical artists. I was never one myself, and the flow state, dramatic artists who have that flair are always more visible and attractive. I like the Debussy/Ravel dichotomy. Both pretty equally respected now, although I think Debussy is more well known, and he was the flashy flow state guy. He's easy to fall in love with right off the bat, but Ravel takes time to appreciate, and Ravel was the method man. As I get older I've shifted from preferring Debussy to now preferring Ravel. I liken it to a hot and heavy summer fling versus realizing twenty years later that you love your best friend from growing up and then get married to them.

Nice dude. Some cool guitar chords there.

Sure, here's a few tracks from my bandcamp:

Songs:

https://matthewanderson.bandcamp.com/track/definite-form

https://matthewanderson.bandcamp.com/track/our-bones

Ambient:

https://matthewanderson.bandcamp.com/track/eternal-dead-ballfields

I agree. The only differentiation I’m making is that I think the experience I’m describing in art is primary in the sense that it’s foundational metaphysically. So rather than inferior to or equal to the logical thought which philosophy uses to try to grasp it, it rather precedes it.

Nice. Somewhat similar for me, took piano lessons from my mom who is a private piano teacher (one of two jobs) from about age 9 to 13, reached a high intermediate level, then picked it back up in college after focusing on guitar and drums in the interim. I’ve really picked it back up in the past 5 years and want to write some proper classical-ish piano music but have only dabbled; keeps getting pushed to the back burner in favor of other musical projects. The only video of me playing is on instagram; here’s a link although I’m not sure if it will work; I think you at least need an instagram account to view.

https://instagram.com/p/B7_8NhXlpsz/

Good technique. :up: you studied piano right? I didn’t know the Addinsell piece either, sounds interesting.

23 albums and counting; — AmadeusD

:gasp: and I thought my 9 not including EPs and bands was a lot for a hobbyist. Comfortable sharing any links? PM is fine. No worries if not.

Right, art doesn’t want to explain anything. What I’m suggesting is it can sometimes be like an immediate immanent experience of the reality that philosophy seeks. Similar to someone having a spiritual breakthrough via a psychedelic experience that a meditation practitioner may spend their entire lives practicing to achieve.

At this point, for me the most sublime experiences I’ve had of art feel like fleeting glimpses into the nature of reality that a lifetime of philosophical study might never achieve (but maybe it can for some). Of course, philosophy is generally seeking more like the whole picture, rather than a glimpse.

Of course, a lot if not most art doesn’t provide a window for this glimpse, or doesn’t attempt to. I would provisionally delineate art into exoteric (non-glimpse-into etc) and esoteric (glimpse). Of course the word esoteric has a lot of baggage, but I think it’s an appropriate differentiation to make here.

So as to the nature of art, its root, its esoteric experiential purpose if you will (experiential because mankind has been making art for as long as we know, and the process of making it, interpreting it, and philosophizing about it is a historically experiential process) is to reach out and try to grasp the nature of reality. Exoteric permutations are not concerned with their root or its purpose, which, by the way, is fine with me.

This is just my current thought process du jour on the nature of art.

Addendum: to expand on the experiential aspect of art I mentioned, I’m really just referring to what I think is the experiential nature of all human experience (ha). By default I was going to say “arts…esoteric purpose”, but that sounds as if I think I have special knowledge into an esoteric topic, which is not my point. To me all philosophy is experiential; humans questioning and seeking throughout history. The exoteric/esoteric distintion makes sense to me in this context because esoteric here doesn’t mean something mystical or secret. Inevitably in the experiential search for the nature of reality, the distinction between what is found in every day experience, whether that be through logical deduction, science, or social constructs, etc, is distinct from that something that is found (glimpsed) behind the everyday. Anyway, I think great art is one way we experience this.

Call For The Dead - John Le Carre

Quite good, actually.

I was raised evangelical Christian, perhaps borderline fundamentalist. I broke out of that prison a mere 8 or 10 years ago only to find myself in a different prison, one of belief paralysis, existential crisis, and extreme doubt about absolutely everything. To an outsider all of that fallout may look like a result of my religious indoctrination, which is probably true, but I'm still not a believer in losing one's faith as being a universally enlightening or triumphant experience. Loss of faith has been one long, agonizing divorce for me.

All of that said, I'm not an atheist. But I no longer worry about any ongoing debate about God's existence; I'm now bored by them. Provisionally, my conception of God is probably closest to a Hindu conception, for anyone who cares. I feel no need to defend this belief; I don't care what other people think of it. And I think that's healthier than feeling the need to defend one's belief or lack thereof in God; I'm speaking from experience here.

Is Atheism a religion?