As @OortCloudAtlas notes, some peculiarities of American Buddhism only make sense in light of its roots in 1960s-70s psychedelic culture, and the puritanical 1980s-90s reaction, rejection, and cover-up.
-
Show this thread
-
The puritanical reactionary cleansing of American Buddhism in the 1990s successfully banned the most valuable aspects of Buddhism, along with the bathwater. They may be permanently lost. I wrote about that here: https://vividness.live/2015/09/30/why-westerners-rebranded-secular-ethics-as-buddhist-and-banned-tantra/ …pic.twitter.com/QMK8dJGDQ7
4 replies 4 retweets 16 likesShow this thread -
In the podcast,
@OortCloudAtlas summarizes the non-ordinary consequences as: Impermanence, Suchness, & Meta-Rationality. This valuable reformulation mirrors the traditional tantric progression from ordinary perception through emptiness, energy, and non-duality.2 replies 1 retweet 14 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @Meaningness @OortCloudAtlas
It non-duality really equivalent to meta rationality? It seems to be post rational to me, but not in the ribbonfarm sense, but as deliberate dissociation and restructuring of meaning-as-relevance.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz @OortCloudAtlas
Well… “non-duality” has many meanings, depending on what two things aren’t dual, and what their relationship is if not duality.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
In this context, it refers specifically to the inseparability of form and emptiness. Rationality is forms/frameworks of reasoning/conceptuality. Meta-rationality involves recognizing the inseparable emptiness and form of the relationship between rationality and reality.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @OortCloudAtlas
Ah. I have difficulty with this language, I need to translate to the actual dynamics of mental representation. Since we have different epistemologies and consequently metaphysics, translation might even be impossible. I wonder if ”emptiness“ and ”form“ can be fully salvaged.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz @OortCloudAtlas
Right. I don’t think they can! I’ve substituted “nebulosity” and “pattern” because the traditional metaphysics seems too confused.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness @OortCloudAtlas
I am tempted to translate emptiness as the absence of meaning without a chosen point of reference (all meaning has to be constructed), and form as the discovery that the constructs are intrinsically constrained. Form is the observed structure, once axioms are chosen.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Now: there are apriori constraints discoverable about systems that are able to create dimensions of meaning and discover structure. I know that you are skeptical because you ran in to defective local optima when looking for them... but I think there is a way out of nebulosity.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz @OortCloudAtlas
Well… have fun looking… and if you get discouraged, we can offer you Plan B!
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness @OortCloudAtlas
I am pretty much done here. It works, as far as I can see, and it is compatible with an epistemologically cleaned up understanding of Buddhist perspectives, and Kegan taken with a lots of grains of salt.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.