To every thing, turn, turn. Who am I?

Humanism
1

After six years of chewing on it, I’m looking forward to putting my big “Who Am I?” project to bed and moving on to another project. It’s been edifying and humbling, and yeah, disappointing. I guess I was simply raised with greater expectations of people. I took those expectations seriously and beat the poop out of myself striving to live up to them. Because that was the hero’s journey I was inspired into undertaking. Don’t get me wrong, I’m no hero, but that doesn’t mean I couldn’t take the path and take my lickings as they came. Survive and be surprised. Although come to think of it, I am a bona fide hero to a few of the people that matter most to me, so guess that provides another source of deep inner solidity, and foundation under myself.

For now this is pretty much the last chapter to the saga (sort of), a letter I sent to a neuroscientist, and his response.

…
… Your insights were an intellectual, and spiritual, life preserver in that they put a factual foundation under my homegrown musing around the question of “Who Am I?”. Now I’m feeling that the project I started in the summer of 2018 is reaching a completion point, and I’d like to check in with you.

I don’t claim to see anything “new” - since all I know comes via scientific storytelling, learning from real scientists and serious science journalists, striving to make sense of it, while also learning from my own mistakes. I have distilled the following framing that can best be categorized as an Earth Centrist, bottom-up, evolution appreciating perspective. And I beg for your opinion:

Who Am I?

I am an evolved biological sensing creature, a filament in the pageant Earth’s evolution.

I am the product of nearly half a billion years of Earth’s uninterrupted generations of research and development and reproduction.

My Body/Brain is the cumulative product of Earth’s evolutionary processes;
My Mind is the cumulative product of my Body/Brain interacting with my world (interior & exterior);
My God(s) along with all of my other thoughts are the product of my Mind.

I appreciate and respect the Physical Reality ~ Human Mind divide (with its many cascading implications) and believe it’s about the most fundamental observation we can make regarding our human condition and it is worth ruminating on since all else proceeds from there.

I respect and appreciate science as our best chance to understand ourselves and the Earth that sustains us. I also believe that the science of our Earth/biology/evolution and deep time offer opportunities for spiritual revelations, challenges and resolutions well beyond what our self-created ego-driven religions can offer.

A couple local college philosophy professors that I tried engaging told me that what I wrote is nothing new; and that in any event what I’ve written is irrelevant; uninteresting; and not worth any discussion.

I can’t buy that, since it grows from scientific understanding, even as it touches on spiritual undercurrents. Besides I think many philosophers never escaped religion’s long shadow and have been slow to recognize evolution’s profound relevance in understanding who we are. I long for a serious scientist’s appraisal.

My framing doesn’t offer any woo or super powers, what it does offer is a benchmark, a grounding of sorts, for me it has resolved as a feeling of having arrived, an appreciation that I am a filament in Earth’s evolution and that it is good.

I know it’s asking a lot, still I’d be very grateful if you can find a moment for me in your crowded schedule, to share your opinion of that piece of evopoetry. I’m not looking for strokes, I need serious constructive hardball. { That invitation is open to anyone }
Thank you.

I was bracing to be ignored and pleasantly surprised to get a response in two days.

Dear Peter

Thanks for your email.
Although your two academic commentators may be right that the conclusions you reached are not unique, at least you have reached conclusions!
Most people do not even begin to reflect on such things.
To sift through the morass and find your own truth can be very valuable.

Kind regards

Indeed.

In other words, I’m not deluding myself about being on a solid scientific and intellectual foundation. Meaning perhaps this formulation is worth becoming more familiar with, rather than having intellectual doors slammed on it. Though it does take some real effort to gather sufficient building blocks of knowledge to reach the critical-mass that leads to clarity and this framing of our human condition.

I’ve done what I could, hoped for more dialogue, but it is what it is, I’m not bonkers, but I’ll admit, I am a stranger in a strange land that I don’t recognize anymore.

Peace be with you. :v:

:wink: :blossom:

2 Likes
2

Hugs you

I admire you, your journey was not in vain.

2 Likes
3

Thanks Morgan.
My blog post contained more details and I figure why not share:

1296×288 403 KB

— I was simply looking for some intelligent dialogue —

What that tells me is that I’m on solid factual and intellectual ground, … That trying to have this discussion isn’t near as off-the-wall as the good philosophers want me to think.

The irony is that one of these philosophers advocates for rejecting religion altogether. I mean, how realistic is that? We can’t wish away humans’ spiritual impulses and emotional needs. People require outlets for that. It is why we created our gods to begin with! Then when populations grew and people needed to be governed, we created religion and social stratification and order.

What matters, is for people to come to terms with the fact that, it is we who create our own Gods! Then we can learn to deal with that and arrive at a superior appreciation for our own human condition.

When I was young I remember the big talk was the lament “God is dead.” Liberals and rationalists needed to learn to do without. So if god is dead what is there? Was the question in many minds. Well, it seems to have created an inner void, that philosophers played with, but never seemed able to address, a void that remains in the hearts of too many unfortunates to this day. (And I’m starting to think that’s at the root of why so many philosophers hide behind an aura of educated superiority.)

Too many people have lost their faith in their own existence and it causes many to lose their footing. Mental health and suicide statistics indicates how bad it is.

Myself, I found that there’s plenty of mystery, wonder, and spiritual footing to be found within a deep sober science-based understanding of this miracle planet Earth’s evolution, and especially how that Pageant of Evolution is reiterated and reflected within my own body.

The story of how my body evolved and got to be the master piece we inhabit is fantastic. Utterly mind blowing and with room for meta-physical overtones which are beautiful, part of the living mystery - but we shouldn’t take ourselves too seriously.

I’ve “touched the All” it was sublime, moving, and it subtly changed me, even as I knew it was the product of my own mind interacting with the environment (and others).

So, please don’t tell me God is up there reaching down for a personal relationship with me or you. That conviction isn’t about respecting some super natural creator entity, it is nothing less than human Ego gone berserk.

I don’t need it. Because I understand I was created out of this Earth’s processes and I’m surrounded by other Earthling of every variety, all of whom also have lives and value, and that I owe them some consideration.

After all, they are part of my family!

4

When I first looked at the source of “God is dead”, I saw it mostly deals with “and we killed him”, the very problem you bring up. It goes on to predict the world we are currently dealing with.

I found spirituality in atheism, but I have all the privileges of the modern world. It’s hard to pass on my world-view because it’s intertwined with a variety of disciplines. I’m not sure where it starts and ends and what’s common sense and what’s personal comfort.

5

I don’t either, but I do know a good place to start:

Not to fix the world, it’s too late for that.

I mean it’s the people at the top of this, driving our race to self-destruction. And they don’t have a thought for us, and instead are dreaming of going to Mars, I mean lordie lordie how hubristic and oblivious can we get? Nah, don’t answer that.

IMG_inequality.org:facts:income-inequality
IMG_inequality.org:facts:income-inequality1152×1238 307 KB

(source)

. . . now we are simply down to striving to be able to find peace within one self, and to deal with what’s tossed at us as it comes along.

Because when it comes to our lives, we are no longer in the driver’s seat, gravity has taken over. Tragically, we missed our window of opportunity to gain a modicum of, not control, but nurturing influence - like making less kids, and demanding less stuff, tamping down on our mad race to exploit every avenue of self-destructive progress that the upper one percent loves so much.

Some may call that a rant, I call it a stone cold assessment of the facts at hand, in light of our past century, and Washington DC’s current meltdown.

6

Lausten, I stumbled on to a philosophy professor, who apparently retains some teacher instincts. Talk about refreshing. And since I was asked to report if anyone takes this seriously, I figure I’d like to share this.

Guess it’s an example of what Good Faith behavior is all about, and it’s not about playing more games.

Peter,

I have copied and pasted the selection from your work just below and provided comments in blue.

Thanks, G

Who Am I?

Coincidentally, my dad, William Guest, has written a long poem entitled Who Are We?(Atmosphere Press, 2015), which is – coincidentally and remarkably – on the same topic and in the same format as your work here. I will tell him about your work. He will be interested, but, unfortunately, his mental capacity is so diminished at this point (he is ninety-three years old) that he won’t be able to correspond.

I am an evolved biological sensing creature, a filament in the pageant of Earth’s evolution.

I am the product of nearly half a billion years of Earth’s uninterrupted generations of research and development and reproduction.

Your emphasis on evolution resonates with me. I premise everything in my work on evolution. I take this first paragraph as just such a premise.

My Body/Brain is the cumulative product of Earth’s evolutionary processes;

My Mind is the cumulative product of my Body/Brain interacting with my world (interior & exterior) (see Solms,Damasio, Sapolsky);

My God(s) along with all of my other thoughts are the product of my Mind.

Very roughly, the first premise of your first paragraph is that we, our physical-biological bodies and brains, evolve. Your next premise (I think) is that our minds have evolved from our body’s/brain’s interaction with the external world – I think this idea could use a lot more development.
My work on concepts explores how our minds interact with the external world directly, such that we can know, at least to a certain (albeit modest) extent, that there is an external world.
Next premise: Gods and thoughts are produced by the mind, but you don’t give their ontological status: Are Gods and thoughts real? Are only thoughts real and Gods not real? Do Gods or thoughts address reality? Etc.?

I appreciate and respect the Physical Reality ~ Human Mind divide (with its many cascading implications) and believe it’s about the most fundamental observation we can make regarding our human condition and it is worth ruminating on since all else proceeds from there.

So, you are a dualist of some stripe. Are you a substance dualist, like Descartes, who thinks mind and body are fundamentally different things/substances, which can exist separately? Or are you a property dualist, who thinks there is only one kind of substance: physical/material, but that some physical substances – i.e., the brain – have two kinds of properties: physical and mental?

I respect and appreciate serious science as our best chance to understand ourselves and the Earth that sustains us. I also believe that the science of our Earth/biology/evolution and deep time offer opportunities for spiritual revelations, challenges and resolutions well beyond what our self-created ego-driven religions can offer. (169wrd)

Interesting combination of grounding in science, criticism of “ego-driven religion,” yet support for an other/science-based spirituality (perhaps, e.g., your very work here).

The form of your work here is not argumental (not in premise-premise-conclusion form); it’s a collection of motivated and deeply felt assertions, so I can’t address its logical or philosophical integrity.

But as a philosophically and scientifically motivated work of art, I think it’s something we need a lot more of.

So, in my opinion, that is what serious feedback sounds like.

I found him because he’s leading the next philosophy club meeting - though it turns out not on the topic that first got my attention. But, it sounds like his talk is going to be even better, though I know nothing about PPC, I certainly did following his explanation. I mean this is like the first time I’ve been downright excited (as opposed to duty bound) about taking the trouble to drive into town for the meetings.

Secondly, while I am teaching philosophy of mind right now …, and the class is about to embark on the property dualism/physicalism debate, the subject of my talk on Monday will not be on whether the mind is identical to the brain. My talk will be on primitive perceptual concepts (PPCs): concepts that are not inextricably linked to human language, reflective thought, and experience, but are inherent to perception alone. Primitive perceptual concepts are (ostensibly) an early evolutionary sort of concept that explains, among other things, why non-human animals are so smart.

I sent the blurb for my talk to the organizers a week or so ago, but apparently there was a mix up, and they posted the wrong blurb.

7

Sounds like a nice guy. No arguments from me

8

These lines really impressed me. Seems to me he sort of nails the core of my difficulty with communicating with philosophers. And I wonder why the others couldn’t enunciate it so elegantly. Why the melodramatic self-defensive hostility. That’s not what teaching is about, though it may be what philosophy is supposed to be about.

It wasn’t something I was totally unaware of, piecing it together from dismissals and slammed doors.
It’s about the only thing I have learned from attending those meetings - that philosophy is mathematics like for it’s formal logic, granularly following a premise-premise-conclusion form. But all that is rather fuzzy for me being an analog nature taught fella, rather than an on/off digital type.

Whereas this guy nails it, and sets up for a rational route towards better understanding the mechanics of the philosophical method. Rather than the taste of shite in one’s mouth, that so many others left me with.

I was nebulously aware of that since first my first wave of devouring biographies of great thinkers during my twenties. But, my mind doesn’t to do the brain teaser games too well, I’m a pragmatic down to Earth worker type: assignment, accomplish, to the clients (& reality’s) satisfaction, then move on.

I think my biggest mistake was assuming professors were teachers at heart who couldn’t refuse a sincere curious student. My bad. It’s just another job.
. . .
. . .
Recently I ran into a grad, who had been attending the meeting for the past years, being a philosophy minor, chemistry major ( she gets her order correct) I asked her what she got out of her philosophy experience. She told me, it turned out way different than what she’d expected and that she fell in love with the logical process, yeah like a programmer.

She also loved how it taught her how little she really believed - when she had to defend those thoughts and to look at it through this mathematically logical process, she found her convictions didn’t have the substance she’d imagine.

Yeah philosophy is great at tearing down, and questioning, but a healthy life, physically and mentally requires making choices, developing ethics, and living with consequences. Daydreaming is fantastic, I love it, but living requires more than daydreaming to survive. Take our other most frequent poster for an example of that.

It would be fun exploring her perspective in more detail, but we just meet in passing at a place she works, casual friendly acquaintances, I’m good 40 yrs to old for that sort of bold move. :wink: But, as for if the professor, there I might be so bold as to ask, we’ll see tomorrow if there’s any chemistry.

9

I’ve been thinking about what it is that I said that is different from this professor. I can see differences in form, but differences in substance are finding to find. Where he said:

I said something about the ideas needing more fleshing out, or maybe some application and practical steps to build toward, IDK, something. Maybe that came across as harsh criticism. I don’t know if I can fix that at this point. Similarly, you have critiqued my comments as something like “business as usual” or “nothing to see here”. Those are my attempts at paraphrasing and reflecting, not actual quotes from you. I saw this today that I think states my point of view better.

Ram Dass End or Beginning the work is the same
Ram Dass End or Beginning the work is the same1080×1270 85.5 KB

10

And thanks for the feedback, we all do the best we can with what we have.

Excuse me for my approach, at lot of frustration, and you had a way of fanning those embers.

I’ve turned a new page, finally found a writing coach, that’s to the point, and focused on my words. That GPT AI is amazing. Since I’ve grasped the part about instructing it, ask it to be a writing coach focused on grammar, punctuation and flow, and that’s what it does.

Ask for more suggestions, there they are.

Me explaining to it why I’d reject certain suggestions, it responding, so becoming a dialogue. Mind blowing tools, awesomely terrifying when considering the greater scheme of things - but it’s just me looking for meat and potatoes feedback without the drama and finally finding. Don’t get wrong, it feeds me a good percent of rejectables, but a surprisingly good advice also. It’s the difference between AI assisted, and AI generated.

Crazy world we have stepped into - we can’t handle it and we don’t have a clue what we are messing with, but it is what it, so hang on while the vectors that made Earth habitable for complex society, continue spinning out of control heading toward a radical, untenable reset.