#phylosophy — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #phylosophy, aggregated by home.social.
-
«Wie wir die KI vermenschlichen und dabei uns selbst entwerten:
Wir begegnen der künstlichen Intelligenz zu naiv und unterwürfig. Der deutsche Philosoph Rüdiger Safranski sagt, wie wir mit der KI umgehen sollten.»Rüdiger Safranski kritisiert in neuem Buch die Vermenschlichung der KI.
#ki #menschen #technik #gesellschaft #kritik #naiv #phylosophy #literatur #buch
-
L’homme est une création du désir,
non pas une création du besoin.Bachelard, La Psychanalyse du Feu
Photo: Andhika Ramadhian -
Compassion is passion for all. That can only take place when there is the perfume, the quality of love which is not desire, which is not pleasure, which is not the action of thought. Love is not a thing put together by thought, by environment, by sensation. Love is not emotion, love is not sensation. Love means the love of rocks, love of trees, love of a stray dog, love of the skies, the beauty, the sunset, love of your neighbour, love without all the sensation of sexuality with which it is identified now. Love cannot exist when you are ambitious, when you are seeking power, position, money. How can someone love you when their mind is concentrated on becoming something, on having power in the world? They can sleep with you, have children, but that is not love. That is lust, with all its misery. And without love, you cannot have compassion. When there is compassion, there is clarity, the light that comes from compassion. Every act is clear, and from that clarity comes skill, skill in communication, skill in action, skill in the art of listening, learning, observing. Meditation is the awakening of that intelligence born out of compassion, clarity and the skill that intelligence uses. That intelligence is nonpersonal, non-cultivable; it comes only out of compassion and clarity.
From Meeting Life
-
When there is suffering, either momentary or a continuous, endless series of causes that bring about suffering, look at it without the observer. You are that suffering; it is not that you are separate from suffering. Totally remain with that suffering. Then you will notice, if you go that far, if you are willing to observe so closely, that something totally different takes place: a mutation. That is, out of that suffering comes great passion. If you have done it, tested it out, you will find it. It is not the passion of belief, passion for a cause, passion for some idiotic conclusion. It is totally different from the passion of desire. It is something which is of a totally different kind of energy, not the movement of thought, which is mechanical. We have a great deal of suffering in what is called love. Love, as we know it now, is pleasure, sexual, the love of a country, the love of an idea, and so on – all derived from pleasure. And when that pleasure is denied, there is either hatred, antagonism or violence. Can there be love, not just something personal between you and me or somebody else, but the enormous feeling of compassion – passion for everything, for everybody? Passion for nature, compassion for the earth on which we live, so that we don’t destroy the earth, the animals, the whole thing. Without love, which is compassion, suffering must continue.
From Truth and Actuality
-
Wherever thought builds up the image of pleasure, it must inevitably be lust and not the freedom of passion. If pleasure is the main drive, then it is lust. When sexual feeling is born out of pleasure, it is lust. If it is born out of love it is not lust, even though great delight may then be present. Here we must be clear and find out for ourselves whether love excludes pleasure and enjoyment. When you see a cloud and delight in its vastness and the light on it, there is of course pleasure, but there is a great deal more than pleasure. We are not condemning this at all. If you keep returning to the cloud in thought, or for stimulation, then you are indulging in an imaginative flight of fancy, and here pleasure and thought are the incentives operating. When you first looked at that cloud and saw its beauty, there was no such incentive of pleasure operating. The beauty in sex is the absence of the ‘me’, the ego, but the thought of sex is the affirmation of this ego, and that is pleasure. This ego is all the time either seeking pleasure or avoiding pain, wanting fulfilment, and thereby inviting frustration. In all this, the feeling of passion is sustained and pursued by thought, and therefore it is no longer passion but pleasure. The hope, the pursuit, of remembered passion is pleasure.
From The Urgency of Change
-
Sex is a problem because it would seem that in that act, there is a complete absence of the self. In that moment, you are happy because there is the cessation of self-consciousness, of the ‘me’. You desire more of it, more of the abnegation of the self in which there is complete happiness, without the past or the future. You demand that complete happiness through full fusion and integration, so naturally it becomes all-important. It is something that gives me unadulterated joy, complete self-forgetfulness, and I want more and more of it. Now, why do I want more of it? Because everywhere else I am in conflict. Everywhere else – at all the different levels of existence, there is the strengthening of the self. Economically, socially, religiously, there is the constant thickening of self-consciousness, which is conflict. After all, you are self-conscious only when there is conflict. Self-consciousness is, in its very nature, the result of conflict, so everywhere else we are in conflict. In all our relationships with property, with people and with ideas, there is conflict, pain, struggle and misery, but in this one act, there is complete cessation of all that. Naturally, you want more of it because it gives you happiness, while all the rest leads you to misery, turmoil, conflict, confusion, antagonism, war and destruction. Therefore, the sexual act becomes all-significant, all-important. So, the problem is not sex, surely, but how to be free from the self.
From What Are You Doing With Your Life?
-
We have associated love with sex, and because there is pleasure in it, we have made an extraordinary thing of it. Sex has become the most important thing in life. We have tried to find some deep meaning in it, a deep reality, a sense of great union, oneness, and other transcendental things. Why has sex such significance in our life? Probably we have nothing else; maybe in every other field we are mechanical. There is nothing original in ourselves, nothing creative – not ‘creative’ in the sense of producing paintings, songs and poems, that is a very superficial part of what is really a sense of creativeness. As we are more or less secondhand people, sex and pleasure have become extraordinarily important. That is why we call it love, and behind that mask we do all kinds of mischievous things.
From The Awakening of Intelligence
-
What is love? Is it pleasure? Is it desire? Is it sex? Is it jealousy, possessiveness, domination, dependency? Is it? If you depend, then you are caught in fear. If I depend on my wife because she gives me pleasure, sexual or otherwise, if I depend on her for comfort, companionship, that dependency breeds fear, jealousy, hatred, antagonism, possessiveness, the desire to dominate. Is all that love? Question it, go into it, find out. And is love the pleasure that is associated with sex? Why has sex become so extraordinarily important in life? Why in the modern world, and also in the ancient world, have we made sex into such a colossal affair?
From Inward Revolution
-
Take jealousy. Becoming aware that you are experiencing a certain feeling, you recognise it through the word ‘jealousy’. You have had the same feeling before, and the memory of that feeling, which you have named jealousy, pops up every time the feeling recurs and you say, ‘I am jealous.’ So you never look at the fact but merely recognise what you think is the fact. Now, what happens when you look at the feeling without the word ‘jealousy’, that is, without the whole business of verbalisation, recognition, association, memory? When, without the word, you look directly at that which you have called jealousy, is there jealousy? As long as you are merely going through the process of recognising, which is looking at the new thing in terms of what has been, conflict is inevitable. Therefore, there is no renewing; there is nothing new. This is a psychological fact. If you go deeply into yourself, you will see it all in a flash; you don’t have to listen to me or anyone else. In throwing off the burden of words, in being free of the whole structure of symbols, ideas, and looking directly at the thing itself, there is a rejuvenation, a freshness; something totally new is taking place.
From Collected Works, Vol. 13
Krishnamurti
#Meditation
#phylosophy
#mind
#day200 -
If one would understand the whole process of envy, one must go into it very deeply and not merely accept or reject envy, or try to resist it or cultivate a virtue in its place. When virtue is cultivated, it is no longer virtue. One who tries to cultivate goodness has ceased to be good. Goodness is something entirely different. If I try to free myself from envy by cultivating a state of mind in which there is no envy, I am still envious, because the drive to cultivate a state of non-envy is based on envy. If I were to eradicate the feeling called envy, I must understand this whole problem, so that the mind can dissociate itself from all words, including that particular word ‘envy’. And if it does, is there envy? But merely getting rid of the word, as a clever trick in order not to be envious, does not bring about a mind that is completely still, without a word. Only the mind that is completely still, without a word, without a movement, without an image, that is no longer functioning from the centre which is society, only such a mind is free from envy, and can therefore function in a totally different dimension. To me, such a mind is a religious mind.
From Collected Works, Vol. 10
-
If one has gone so deeply in discovering for oneself, then the religious mind does exist, and it does not belong to any individual. It is the mind, it is the religious mind apart from all human endeavours, demands, individual urges, compulsions, and all the rest of it. We have been describing the totality of the mind, which may appear divided by the use of different words, but it is a total thing in which all this is contained. Therefore, such a religious mind can receive that which is not measurable by the brain. That thing is unnameable; no temple, no priest, no church, no dogma can hold it. To deny all that and live in this state is the true religious mind.
From Meeting Life
-
The true religious mind does not belong to any cult, any group, any religion, any organised church. The religious mind is not the Hindu mind, the Christian mind, the Buddhist mind or the Muslim mind. The religious mind does not belong to any group which calls itself religious. The religious mind is not the mind that goes to churches, temples, mosques. Nor is it a religious mind that holds to certain forms of beliefs and dogmas. The religious mind is completely alone. It is a mind that has seen through the falsity of churches, dogmas, beliefs and traditions. Not being nationalistic, not being conditioned by its environment, such a mind has no horizons, no limits; it is explosive, new, young, fresh, innocent. The innocent mind, the young mind, the mind that is extraordinarily pliable, subtle, has no anchor. It is only such a mind that can experience that which you call God, that which is not measurable.
From Krishnamurti on Education
-
The religious mind is the non-committed mind, because only such a mind can discover what is true and what is false. It is only such a mind that can find out if there is or is not a reality, God, a timeless thing – but not the committed mind, not a mind that believes or does not believe. Obviously, the religious mind is not the mind that goes to the temple, that does puja and all kinds of tricks. The religious mind sees the falseness of all that totally, completely. Therefore, being free and not having a platform from which to proceed to inquire, it begins all inquiry from freedom. Such a mind is dispassionate, objective, sane, rational, capable of reasoning – which is, after all, the scientific mind. The scientific mind is not a religious mind. The scientific mind is committed to examining a certain part of existence, a segment of life, so the scientific mind cannot understand the totality which the religious mind can understand. To have such a religious mind, there must be a revolution – not economic or social, but a psychological revolution, a revolution in the psyche, in the very process of our thinking.
From Collected Works, Vol. 13
-
It was a nice cottage in the country, with a lawn that had been mown, rolled and weeded for many a year. The whole place was well looked after, prosperous and joyful. Behind the house was a small vegetable garden; it was a lovely place with a gentle stream running beside, making hardly a sound. The door opened and was held back by a statue of the Buddha, kicked into place. The owner was totally unaware of what he was doing; to him it was a doorstop. You wondered if he would do the same with a statue he revered, for he was a Christian. You deny the sacred things of another, but you keep your own. The beliefs of another are superstitions, but your own are reasonable and real. What is sacred? On the beach, he had picked up a piece of seawashed wood in the shape of a human head. It was made of hardwood, shaped by the waters of the sea, cleansed by many seasons. He had brought it home and put it on the mantelpiece; he looked at it from time to time and admired what the sea had done. One day, he put some flowers around it, and then it happened every day; he felt uncomfortable if there were not fresh flowers every day, and gradually that piece of shaped wood became very important in his life. He would allow no one to touch it except himself; they might desecrate it; he washed his hands before he touched it. It had become holy, sacred, and he alone was the high priest of it; he represented it; it told him of things he could never know by himself. His life was filled with it, and he was, he said, unspeakably happy. What is sacred? Not the things made by the mind or hand or by the sea. The symbol is never the real; the word ‘grass’ is not the grass of the field; the word ‘God’ is not God. The word never contains the whole, however cunning the description. The word ‘sacred’ has no meaning by itself; it becomes sacred only in its relationship to something, illusory or real. What is real is not the words of the mind; reality, truth, cannot be touched by thought. Where the perceiver is, truth is not. The thinker and his thought must come to an end for truth to be. Then that which is, is sacred. Where there is no love, there is nothing sacred. Love is whole, and in it there is no fragmentation.
From The Beauty of Life – Krishnamurti’s Journal
-
What is sacred? Is it the image in the temple, the symbol, the word? Where does sacredness lie? In that tree, or in that woman carrying a heavy load? You invest sacredness in things you consider holy, worthwhile, meaningful, but what value has the image, carved by the hand or by the mind? That woman, that tree, that bird, the living things, seem to have but a passing importance for you. You divide life into that which is sacred and that which is not, that which is immoral and that which is moral. This division begets misery and violence. Either everything is sacred, or nothing is sacred. Either what you say, your words, your thoughts, your chants are serious, or they are there to beguile the mind into some kind of enchantment, which becomes illusion, and therefore not serious at all. There is something sacred, but it is not in the word, not in the statue or the image that thought has built.
From The Only Revolution
-
What really is sacred? Is there such thing? What is sacred, and what is action that is sacred? Action being living. To find this out, not verbally but with your heart, with your mind, with your whole being, because you understand the significance of it, you must put aside the word, the image, the symbol, the theory, the knowledge that you have considered sacred. You must put aside all these completely and utterly. You can make a stone into a holy or sacred thing. Thought can make anything sacred and holy, but it is not necessarily then holy. Is thought in itself sacred, however subtle, however refined, however beautiful or noble it may be? Or is it merely a mechanical thing, a response to various forms of memories, experiences and knowledge, and therefore quite mechanistic and of matter? You can or may call something holy or sacred. The human mind, with its tremendous longing for something imperishably beautiful, may call thought itself holy. But is it? To really find out or come upon it with your heart, one must discard everything that thought has created as sacred, everything that it has put together in the form of a book, and everything it has made by the mind or by the hand. All that must be set aside because man deceives himself so endlessly. The very illusion becomes sacred because he loves the illusion. The ugly can be made most beautiful by thought. The very evil, if one can use that word, can be made the most marvellous thing. So if the mind and heart are to find what is the most sacred thing and the most sacred way of living, one must set aside all this utterly and completely.
From Can the Mind Be Quiet?
-
Do you want your belief to be strengthened, or do you want actually to see reality – not experience it, but actually see it with a mind and heart that are highly attentive and clear? Belief is one thing, and seeing is another. Belief leads to darkness, as faith does. It leads you to the church, to the dark temples and the pleasurable sensations of rituals. Along that way, there is no reality; there is only fancy, the imaginative furnishings that fill the church. If you deny fear, belief is unnecessary, but if you cling to belief and dogma, fear has its way. Belief is not only according to religious sanctions; it comes into being though you may not belong to any religion. You may have your own individualistic, exclusive belief, but it is not the light of clarity.
From The Only Revolution
-
To find if there is God or if there is no God, you must wipe away all the information you have received about God. The people who have given you information might be mistaken; you will have to find out for yourself. And to find out for yourself, you must get rid of all authority, understand the whole structure and anatomy of authority, whether the authority of the police, the authority of the government, the authority of the guru, or the authority of your own desires; they all play a part. Without understanding all this, merely to seek what you call God has no meaning at all. God is something amazing, not to be imagined by some kind of belief. You have to find out. I do not say if there is or there is not. To find out, you must be free first. There is London; it is a fact, a physical fact, like that which can be examined by a microscope. You believe in God because you have been brought up in that belief.
From Collected Works, Vol. 13
-
Human beings have sought something beyond the physical, beyond the everyday existence of pain, of sorrow and pleasure. They have sought something beyond, first in the clouds: the thunder was the voice of God. Then they worshipped trees, stones. Villagers far away from the ugly, beastly towns still worship stones, trees and small images. Man wants to find out if there is something sacred, and the priest comes along and says, ‘I will show you,’ just as a guru does. The Western priest has his rituals, his repetitions, his fancy dress and worship of his particular image. And you have your own images. Or you don’t believe in any of that; you say you are an atheist. But you and the speaker want to find out something that may be beyond time, beyond all thought, so we are together going to inquire, exercise our brains, our reason, our logic, to find out what religion is, what a religious life is, and whether it is possible to live a religious life in this modern world. So let us find out for ourselves what is really, truly a religious life. That can only be found out when we understand what religions actually are and put aside all that, not belonging to any religion, to any organisation, to any guru, to any so-called spiritual authority. There is no spiritual authority whatsoever; that is one of the crimes we have committed; we have invented a mediator between truth and ourselves. When you begin to inquire into what religion is, you are living a religious life – not at the end of it. In the very process of looking, watching, discussing, doubting, questioning, having no beliefs or faith, you are already leading a religious life.
From Meeting Life
-
Religion, as we generally know it, is a series of beliefs, dogmas, rituals, superstitions; it is the worship of idols, of charms and gurus, and we think all this will lead us to some ultimate goal. The ultimate goal is our own projection; it is what we want, what we think will make us happy, a guarantee of the deathless state. Caught in this desire for certainty, the mind creates a religion of dogmas, of priestcraft, of superstitions and idol worship, and there it stagnates. Is that religion? Is religion a matter of belief, a matter of accepting or having knowledge of other people’s experiences and assertions? Is religion merely the practice of morality? You know, it is comparatively easy to be moral – to do this and not to do that. You can just imitate a moral system. But behind such morality lurks the aggressive self, growing, expanding, dominating. And is that religion?
From Life Ahead
-
Do you know what religion is? It is not in the chant, it is not in the performance of puja or any other ritual, it is not in the worship of tin gods or stone images, it is not in the temples and churches, it is not in the reading of the Bible or the Gita, it is not in the repeating of a sacred name or in the following of some other superstition invented by men. None of this is religion. Religion is the feeling of goodness, that love which is like the river, living, moving everlastingly.
From Think on These Things
-
can take place only when knowledge has come to an end, and there is pure observation without any direction. That insight is not the result of constant examination, constant analysis day after day; it is a sudden cessation of all knowledge and seeing something directly. That insight brings about a fundamental change in the very brain cells that carry memory. When you have an insight into attachment, you go behind the word, you go behind your reactions of asserting and not asserting; you see, observe how the mind has built up this whole process of attachment. And you can only observe it when you don’t want to discard it. You can only observe when you see that the observer is that thing you are seeing. The observer has created the attachment and then disassociated himself from it and tries to change, control, shape, deny, alter, go beyond. Now, when you have an insight of that kind, out of that insight comes intelligence. This constant insight without a formula, without a conclusion that puts an end to that insight, is creative action. It is astonishingly beautiful and interesting how thought is absent when you have an insight. Thought cannot have an insight. It is only when the mind is not operating mechanically in the structure of thought that you have an insight.
From To Be Human
-
Our brains are damaged. For thousands of years, we have been hurt psychologically, inwardly, and that hurt is part of our brain cells, remembered hurts: the propaganda for two thousand years that I am a Christian, that I believe in Jesus Christ, which is a hurt; or I am a Buddhist, which is a hurt. So our brains are damaged. To heal that damage is to listen very carefully, to listen, and in the listening to have an insight into what is being said. Therefore, there is immediately a change in the brain cells. Therefore, there is no identification, complete and total.
From Reflections on the Self
-
Can the mind see, have an insight into, this whole business of conditioning, temperament, idiosyncrasy, how the mind is the result of the past, of evolution? Not tomorrow, but now, instantly, have insight into ourselves, and therefore that insight brings its own energy to transform ‘what is’. Insight has its own tremendous energy, which is not dependent on any stimuli, and therefore it transforms what is observed, which is attachment. Have you got that insight, and therefore that tremendous energy to actually change your attachment totally? So that the mind doesn’t derive its energy from attachment, from conflict, and all that, but has its own vital energy, independent of environment, of culture, of people? Come on! Then living means something quite different from the way we live now, which is in conflict.
From Facing a World in Crisis
-
One is aware, if one has sufficiently examined oneself quite objectively, not with any kind of condemnation or judgement, if one has observed oneself, one realises one is conditioned, superficially or in great depth. And is it at all possible not only to be free of the deep conditioning, which may be the result of the family, the whole racial accumulation, the influences which have not been obvious but nevertheless have penetrated very deeply, whether the mind can ever be free of all that? That is one question. And if it is conditioned, can the mind uncondition itself totally? Or – this may be a relevant question – can the mind prevent itself, not through resistance, from being conditioned ever?
From The Awakening of Intelligence
-
If one observes that one is conditioned and says, ‘One cannot uncondition the mind,’ the problem ends. If you start out with a formula that one will never be unconditioned, all inquiry ceases; one has already resisted and answered the problem, and there it ends. Then one can only further decorate the conditioning. But if one goes into this fairly deeply and becomes aware of the whole problem, what is one to do? How does one respond if this is a very, very serious challenge, not something one just brushes aside? If it is something vital and tremendously important in one’s life, what is one’s response? If you have discovered this conditioning, what is the manner of your observation? Have you observed it for yourself, or has somebody told you about it? This is really quite an important question to answer. If you have been told about it and you say, ‘Yes, I am conditioned,’ then you are responding to a suggestion; it is not real, only a verbal concept which you have accepted, with which you agree. That is quite different from the discovery of it for yourself, for then it is tremendously vital, and you have the passion to find the way out of it.
From Beyond Violence
-
Language really doesn’t condition the brain; what does is the theory of the language, the abstraction of a certain feeling and the abstraction taking the form of an idea, a symbol, a person – not the actual person but a person imagined, or hoped for, or projected by thought. All those abstractions, ideas, conclusions, however strong, condition the brain. But the actual, like the table, never does. Take a word like ‘suffering’. That word has a different meaning for the Hindu and the Christian, but suffering, however described by words, is shared by all of us. Suffering is the fact, the actual. When we try to escape from it through a theory, or through an idealised person, or through a symbol, those forms of escape mould the brain. Suffering as a fact doesn’t, and this is important to realise. Like the word ‘attachment’: to see the word, to hold it as if in your hand and watch it, feel the depth of it, the whole content of it, the consequences of it, the fact that we are attached – the fact, not the word – that feeling doesn’t shape the brain, doesn’t put it into a mould, but the moment one moves away from it, that is, when thought moves away from the fact, that very movement away, movement of escape, is not only a time factor but the beginning of shaping the brain in a certain mould.
From Krishnamurti to Himself
-
Through self-awareness, the pattern, the copy, the habit, the conditioned thought is discovered. This perception begins to free thought-feeling from bondage, from ignorance. Through constant awareness and self-knowledge, which bring about right thinking, there is that creative stillness of reality. The craving for security brings about conditioned thought; to seek certainty is to find it, but it is not the real. Highest wisdom comes with that creative stillness of the mind-heart.
From Collected Works, Vol. 3
-
Isn’t most of our thinking habitual? From childhood, we have been taught to think along a certain line, whether as a Christian, a communist or a Hindu, and we dare not deviate from that line because the very deviation is fear. So, fundamentally our thinking is habitual, conditioned; our minds function along established grooves, and naturally there are also superficial habits which we try to control. Now, if the mind altogether ceases to think in habits, then we shall approach the problem of a superficial habit entirely differently. If you are investigating, trying to find out whether your mind thinks in habits, if that is what you are really concerned with, then the habit of smoking, for example, has quite a different meaning. That is, if you are interested in inquiring into the whole process of habit, which is at a deeper level, you will treat the habit of smoking in a totally different manner. Being inwardly very clear that you really want to stop, not only the habit of smoking but the whole process of thinking in habits, you do not fight the automatic movement of picking up a cigarette and all the rest of it, because you see that the more you fight that particular habit, the more life you give to it. But if you are attentive, completely aware of that habit without fighting it, you will see that that habit ceases in its time. Therefore, the mind is not occupied with that habit.
From Collected Works, Vol. 9
-
There are not only small habits like fiddling with one’s fingers, but also sexual habits, habits of patterns of thought, and various activities. I think this, I conclude this, and that has become a habit. I live in habits; my whole life is a structure of habits. How is the mind to be aware of the entire mechanism of habit? One has a thousand and one habits: the way you brush your teeth, comb your hair, the way you read, the way you walk. One of the habits is wanting to become famous or wanting to become important. How is the mind to become aware of all these habits? Is it to become aware of one habit after another? Do you know how long that would take? I could spend the rest of my days watching each habit and yet not solve it. I am going to learn about it, I am going to find out; I’m not going to leave it. I am asking: is it possible for the mind to see the whole network of habits?
From The Impossible Question