Self-Actualisation is Not Enough

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

📃🎥📚 For book club and bonus content check out patreon.com/thelivingphilosophy ⌛ Timestamps: 0:00 Introduction 2:58 Non-Leftists: Desperate Narcissism 6:33 Leftists: Crushing Misery

[@christophmahler]

I'd commend a look into the writings of 19th century German 'New Hegelian' Karl Christian Planck - a former seminary student of Protestant Theology who - in my impression - came a long way of analyzing a dialectic in Church history between a Platonizing Idealism and an operationalized Aristotelian scholasticism, resulting in an extreme 'splitting' within the image of man and an increasingly detached and materialistic Church. In essays on contemporary politics, he had predicted a failure of an unified German nation state (1871 - weakened and dismantled in 1918 and 1945) and a continued repeat of the 'enlightened' Napoleonic Wars into autocratic Russia as well as a failure of colonization and liberal empire - all connected to said Christological and anthropological misconceptions. A book that was posthumously published was titled 'Testament eines Deutschen' (1881 - there where later editions after each war) - he didn't use Psychoanalysis, but pondered ontological aspects of the soul as it was still possible to publish in that age.

[@ilyaXshuffler]

Yeah, tbh, recent events made me shrink back to my basic needs and day to day life, I just feel what ideologies, media and politicians require of me are just too much and at times just plain disrespectful to me as a human being

[@juliusevolvere6835]

It’s all pretty simple really. In all decisions ask yourself. Is it good for my tribe/family/me? (all those are the same thing) And then do your best.

[@ilyaXshuffler]

@@juliusevolvere6835 while its undeniable that I belong to a certain identity and it no affects my thoughts and opinions I see that a lot of the time they don't always match reality, and I was willing to try to see beyond them, but, finding that its easier to get lost in the "Us vs Them" sauce that trying to bridge that gap between them drove me crazy, especially when its so much easier to be dogmatic because being critical of yourself requires being vulnerable and egoless

[@SpiritualPsychotherapyServices]

@@ilyaXshuffler leftism: Otherwise known as “progressivism” and even more inaccurately as “liberalism”, “leftism” is a designation originating from the French Revolution of 1789, in reference to the political faction that opposed the French (so-called) king. However, the term is currently used in common discourse to describe those criminals who actively support (or at least tacitly condone) a host of OBJECTIVELY-WICKED ideologies and practices that contravene dharma, such as non-monarchical governances and corrupt economic systems (particularly socialism, communism, fascism, and liberal democracies), egalitarianism, feminism, perverse sexuality (especially homosexuality, bestiality, and transvestism), multiculturalism, and the illegitimate abortion of innocent, defenceless, unborn children. Cf. “dharma”. In a vain attempt to legitimize their objectively-immoral propensities, crooked leftists invariably replace accurate terms with blatant EUPHEMISMS, such as “gay”, “sex worker”, “pro-choice”, and “queer”, and of course, coin novel words for notions that cannot exist, particularly the nonsensical term, “transgender”. Furthermore, leftists are always inventing truly inane, vacuous words in order to demonize conservatives, such as “homophobia” and “transphobia” (which literally mean “fear of sameness” and “fear of change”). In the past decade or two (of this treatise being composed), the mass media, especially the motion picture industry and television production companies, has been aggressively promoting all the above CRIMINAL ideologies and practices, helping to expedite the destruction of human civilization. Recently, large corporations have jumped on the leftist bandwagon (so to speak), in order to profit. As explicated in Chapter 11 of this “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”, the state of being of any particular human (or any other animal, for that matter) is due entirely to his or her genetic sequencing and his or her conditioning. Therefore, the explosion of the leftist/liberal mentality in recent decades, particularly in Western countries, has been caused by poor breeding strategies overtaking the more conservative tradition of mate-selection of previous centuries (and indeed, millennia), as well as the concerted effort of Marxists to spread their fiendish ideology throughout the school system and via folk culture. In other words, due to the fact that criminal behaviour (especially the deviant sexual acts mentioned above) has become increasingly more tolerated, condoned, and even GLORIFIED in most countries, there has been a proliferation of corrupt genetic codes within the wider human population. According to genealogists, for (almost) the entire history of humanity, most women have successfully reproduced, whilst a far farsmaller percentage of males have bequeathed their genetic sequence to proceeding generations. Due to the gradual phasing-out of polygamous marriages in even the most conservative societies, as well as the eradication of poverty in most every country, more and more men (as well as women) have been producing offspring. Thus, the human genome has rapidly become adulterated by inferior genetic material (that is, DNA from truly pathetic, uxorious beta-males, bisexuals, and even homosexual couples who engage surrogate mothers or sperm donors in order to conceive children - something of a rare occurrence in previous centuries/millennia). For centuries, breeders of elite animals such as horses, cattle, and dogs, have understood that, by selecting the finest examples of a particular breed of animal for propagation, it will result in offspring with desirable characteristics. For example, present day thoroughbred horses boast a pedigree of the best-available horses from the seventeenth century. Such breeders are willing to pay enormous sums of money, merely to hire the fastest stallions on earth, in order for them to mate with their mares. In the case of we humans, women have traditionally chosen the most competent and masculine men with whom to bear children, and in general, have totally eschewed those males who displayed effeminate traits, and who showed themselves incapable of properly supporting a nuclear family. This phenomenon is known as “hypergamy” in the field of sociology. Unfortunately, due to rapid moral decay over the past few decades, Western women, especially, have become extremely sexually promiscuous, resulting in a multiplication of unwanted progeny (and, of course, an escalation of abortions). Boys born to single mothers often lack proper male role models and invariably become feminized, unable (and often unwilling) to continue a strong lineage of progenitors. The solution to this problem is simply to ensure that society adheres to the principles of DHARMA (see the Glossary definition of that term, as well as Chapter 12). Unsurprisingly, the majority of leftists find it difficult to accept the fact that their criminal mentality is largely inherited (and of course, they are unwilling to acknowledge the blatantly-obvious fact that their ideologies and practices are intrinsically sinful, wicked, evil and immoral in the first place!). It seems the consensus amongst leftist “intellectuals” is that every human mental trait is due entirely to one’s environmental conditioning and social milieu, rather than as a consequence of BOTH one’s genotype and one’s life-long conditioning - a fundamentally-flawed assertion that cannot be scientifically supported. Personally, I would not be surprised if the typical leftist would believe that, if the parents of the twentieth century communist tyrant, Joseph Stalin, and the parents of the Divine Incarnation, Lord Jesus Christ, had somehow crossed the time barrier, and exchanged their baby boys shortly after their births, that Stalin would have grown to become a Prophet for God, whilst Christ would have become a murderous, left-wing tyrant! The chief personality trait of leftists (“adharma vādin”, in Sanskrit) is SELFISHNESS. Leftists find it impossible to admit that the sole reason for them preferring lawlessness (e.g. favouring illegal abortion of innocent children, homosexuality, transvestism, thievery in the guise of economic equality, feminism, et cetera) is that it appeases their own self-centred desires. As impeccably demonstrated in the twelfth chapter of this Holiest Book of All, only by adhering to genuine morality, is it possible for human society to endure, but unfortunately, leftist criminals seem to be deaf, dumb and blind to the truth of the matter, no matter how thoroughly it is explained to them. “Dharma eva hato hanti dharmo rakṣati rakṣitaḥ । tasmād dharmo na hantavyo mā no dharmo hato’vadhīt” (Manusmṛiti 8:15) states that when righteousness (dharma) is destroyed, it destroys, but when the law (dharma) is protected, it protects. So, even though it is utterly beneficial for individuals and for society to adhere to the law, left-leaning persons are unable to grasp this truth. Apart from wretched selfishness, probably the chief characteristic of leftists, is their willingness to sympathize with groups that are considered to be VICTIMIZED by more powerful groups. However, this support for the victimized rarely extends to the infant humans who are maliciously slaughtered by their mothers, so this tendency to fight on behalf of the oppressed seems to be highly selective. Because leftists are, by definition, supportive of communism (or at least, socialism, or at the very least, socialistic public policies), they consider the working class to be oppressed by the business class, darker-skinned human beings to be oppressed by members ofEuropean or European-origin races (even though some European nations have been colonized and/or enslaved by dark-skinned folk in the past), weaker nations oppressed by wealthy/powerful nations, women oppressed by men, disabled by the abled, et cetera. “Leftism” was very reluctantly used in the chapter on feminism. I say “reluctantly” because it is unlikely that the term will perdure for many decades longer. This is simple deductive logic, since, as clearly demonstrated in certain chapters of “F.I.S.H”, human civilization cannot survive with such leftist practices and ideologies in place. If you happen to be reading this Holy Scripture a century or more after its conception, you will probably be residing in a nation (as opposed to a country) ruled by a monarch, following the implosion of post-modern, decadent societies. So, either the term “leftism” will eventually become redundant and obsolete, or else, human civilization will devolve into a decadent, diseased state of existence similar to that of the prehistoric era, when the peoples of the world resided in caves or shacks, subsisting on whatever food can be sourced from the surrounding bushland. I trust that you who are reading these wise words will endeavour to influence your social circles to adhere to right-leaning ideologies and practices, such as (above all) monarchical governance, an entirely free-market economy, sexual purity, veganism, and all other virtuous principles. Fear not, for the truth will surely conquer (“satyam-eva jayate”, in Sanskrit)! Cf. “right-wing”. See “multiculturalism” and “socialism”.

[@riffmondo9733]

Yes. By design it seems. They want us to constantly question reality.

[@Mark.Allen1111]

The problem is you have self-respect. You can’t whore yourself out to the highest bidder. The system might be broken, not the people.

[@Keiranful]

A couple of thoughts on this issue: The first thing any fresh parents learn is that the first rule of care giving is self care. Everyone is worse off, if you start reacting poorly to your baby and shake the little one in the worst case (that happens more often than I'm comfortable thinking about). Taking care of yourself allows you to better take care of the little bundle of joy that is your responsibility. On the other hand, I can understand her gripe with the coaching industry and people like Tony Robbins. The remission rate with these people is north of 95% (some claim up to 99%), meaning that at most 1 out 20 people going to one of these huge seminars Robbins is hosting creates lasting change in their lives. The only change the other 19 have is being short 10 grand. The issue is that creating lasting change is hard and few people stick to their goals. In the end, you have to take care off yourself, if you want to affect change in the world. A stressed, miserable revolutionary (Misérables?) lashing out in anger will only alienate the people who need to be convinced that change is necessary. You simply can't work efficiently (let alone effectively) and with the goals these people pursue, you need both to get anywhere on a reasonable timescale.

[@christophmahler]

Love the parenting analogy. I also love Hugo's imagination that leaves room for genuine sacrifice, 'ransoming' another soul free and even paying for it's alleged sins - compared to restless normative lecture.

[@palindrome.]

As someone who is socially left-wing but who also hates quite a lot of mainstream left-wing attitudes, my working theory is that what you're witnessing is the result of Brandolini's law: "The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude greater than that needed to produce it." At the centre of the breakdown in discourse between right- and left-wing people is that left-wing rhetoric mostly focuses on entrenched and complex social problems (especially the struggles of disenfranchised minorities), and that left-wing people are used claiming to have a moral high-ground and/or scientific consensus. Complex social problems are... complicated; explaining (and defending) them in a serious debate requires lots of patience and knowledge, but also falls apart without a patient and receptive listener. Many leftists commonly refuse to engage or defend against non-leftists because they perceive a breakdown in good-faith discourse (which is of course also perceived by the political centre and right). These leftists' default position becomes "if you don't agree that X is a problem, and if you aren't committed to improving it, then you're a bigot, and should feck off". It's less of a political strategy and more of a coping mechanism to avoid having difficult conversations. Basically: it's hard enough to explain to Grandma that you shouldn't call black people that anymore, or to convince Dad that gay people should be allowed to be married in church - and those are long, challenging, in-person conversations with people who likely care deeply about what you think. Compare that to Twitter, where nobody cares whether you die horribly (and where many would delight), and where any nuance can easily be short-circuited by a meme response or context-free argument which is hard to refute in less than 240 characters ("I identify as an attack helicopter", "all lives matter", etc.), and you see why Brandolini's law is what rules the debate. People would rather read 20-100 words that make "the other guys" sound like morons, than read a nuanced essay-length response that is intended to challenge assumptions. It's 2024; we've already consumed 1000 pieces of information before breakfast - we don't have time to fight with people over issues which we feel are long-settled like abortion, police violence, cancel culture, etc. Leftists often assume they have a moral high ground without even knowing what it is, and invariably forget just how much social progress has been made over the last 60-100 years. Leftists often prefer to exile critics rather than deal with criticism, reductively oversimplify problems and sweep complexity under the rug, and (somewhat fairly) avoid acknowledging that most progressive/liberal social programs only achieve mixed or partial success because they fear it will be used to argue against further change. There is also a tendency to assume that every social problem is genuinely existential; unfortunately, though, the constant wolf-calling has led to some issues not being prioritized by politicians when there is legitimate need for urgency.

[@matviyk3066]

Society is very specialized today. For example a lot of intellectuals don’t understand that deconstruction can only happen at a certain slow scale. You can’t take down a whole major city and build a new one in 50 years. Not everyone is a college student with major in the humanities, 2 courses of humanities for stem fields isn’t enough either. Now think about a lot of people in blue collar jobs that never had the opportunity. Making their young kids learn social justice at elementary school just angers them because they don’t know what it means and possibly don’t have the luxury to deconstruct their thinking. The bandwidth is too occupied, easier to read. Tweet from someone that aligns with you politically at that level of will power.

[@palindrome.]

@@matviyk3066 One of the chief difficulties it is that everyone (to which I am no exception) feels they ought have an opinion about everything, when in truth it's simply not possible to be genuinely informed about more than a handful of topics in our increasingly complicated world; and yet, at the same time, there is also a crisis of trust wherein many people believe that you can't believe what experts say. As you say, it's easier to just find someone whose Tweets you agree with. Of course, further compounding this is that many public intellectuals have a bad habit of speaking about issues beyond the scope of their expertise (Jordan Peterson, Noam Chomsky, everyone on Twitter); but also that most people (again, myself included) don't really question the extent of the expertise of the people to whom they are listening.

[@z_is_for_zombie7423]

You’re not seeing the parallels here? Most people on the right see the same breakdown too. And those memes that lefties get bugs up their butts over (‘all lives matter’ ‘not all men’ ‘I identify as an attack helicopter’) are responses to that same “perceived” breakdown in good faith dialogue. The online right is responding to the same problem the online left is. You’re all in the same infested shit pile. And your damn fool asses are fixated on knife-fighting each other. Why do you think the good faith breakdown is happening? That’s why. It’s not a perceived breakdown, it’s a real breakdown and it’s because you’re all fixated on hating each other while pretending you’re above it all. You want good faith dialogue to come back? Stop being cunts to each other. Ya’ll are the lumpen proletariat.

[@Mbonic]

Another amazing video man. Really baffled. Already 3 mind boggling insights in and the video’s not even finished yet. Keep it up!!

[@alecmisra4964]

Self improvement makes sense regardless of whether society is working well or not. Individuals cannot be expected to correct what the establishment has pre determined to occur, but they can at least look after themselves . It isnt narcissism but realism. Penny is of course a major major part of the problem, her self righteousness her echoing both the narrative and the "solutions" of the establishment (its called "manufactured consent"). But its the way to get ahead in this kind of society of course.

[@michaelmcclure3383]

That's the irony I guess, becoming a useful woke idiot or cheerleader of imperialism is profitable.. Selfish, but with the grandiose illusion of making a difference.

[@christophmahler]

Largely agree. Utopian views are encouraged, because they can never be achieved by definition - and make people buy another 'smoothie'. Penny is only one step away from experiencing compassion for the reactionary to be invited into a 'Young Global Leader' program as she already knows the talking points and can present herself on stage and in writing. She had to de-establish herself amongst a demographic that wouldn't know 'smoothies' in order to deepen her exploration of compassion - which doesn't require any conformity to orthodox norms, really - just instinct, reflection and imagination.

[@BloodStarvedBrotherhood]

There seems to be a heavy emphasis on the idea that revolution is required, whether with the left and the desire for societal revolution or the right and the desire for self revolution. What I believe is needed is evolution, both of society and the human individual, and that these processes must become complementary. I have the sense that there is the potential for individuals to find a sort of flow of attention between self and societal evolution, and that this flowing unity is the next step of human or consciousness evolution. The dichotomy brought up in the article between desperate narcissism and crushing misery is, I believe, a product of the limits of the current stage of evolution, which to me is an egoic mind-body complex ignorant to spirit. This disconnect from spirit creates this sense of inescapable seperation between the self, the world, and others; that I am a mind trapped in a body and bound to be slain by the uncaring progression of some alien world.

[@christophmahler]

"(...) an egoic mind-body complex ignorant to spirit." A terrible way of phrasing that a realism is required that doesn't reduce man to a consumer of bread.

[@michaelmcclure3383]

Yes, this age is the apotheosis of materialism.

[@1992heb]

You put out great work that doesn't conform to any agenda and I really appreciate that. Thanks for continuing to share your thoughts with us

[@Kastelt]

I recently began reading "Industrial society and it's future" and this reminds me of it a bit. I'm at the earlier parts of the text where Kaczynski (I likely spelled that wrong) basically makes a psychological analysis of the origin of the attitudes and ways of acting of left wingers, and honestly being one myself to a degree I *did* feel called out. Basically his point is that because of inferiority feelings and "sobresocialización" (would be over socialization or something like that in English, I don't know since I'm reading it in my native language, Spanish) we tend to "rebel" in a way that's just affirming what's considered good by society by critizing it because it's not good enough (so basically it's not rebellion). So I assume that the points presented in this video kind of relate to that in a way. I also find that ever since I've began learning more about philosophy and with help of my psychologist I also tend to dislike other left wingers more because I think sometimes they are too extreme in well, being "offended". I don't know to what extent this comment would be revenant but it's something I wanted to write.

[@BoB-uy5ro]

Really necessary insight, thanks for highlighting it. It reminds me of something Joseph Lee from This Jungian Life podcast said a while back-something to the effect that we are never neither as big nor as small as we think we are, but always somewhere in between. So we are never so utterly insignificant in the face of the collective, nor as paramount in our own lives (because as Alan Watts says, "Existence is relationship"). That balancing act is a lifelong effort, I think. Erich Neumann wrote about Captivity and Possession. I think they represent the extremes we’re working with here. In captivity, he writes that “the ego remains totally dependent upon the father as the representative of collective norms.” This is similar to “Isaac’s utter reliance upon his father (Abraham), whom he follows in all things without ever standing on his own feet.” Possession, as Neumann explains, is when the ego identifies with the father-god, or is possessed by “heavenly inflation.” We can see this in Icarus who flew too close to the sun. In both cases, the individual loses touch with a side of themselves, be it the earthly side (which I construe as collective) or the spiritual one (which I associate with the individual).

[@shedactivist]

Just another, fancier way to say that the best path in life, and for society, is to tread the fine line between order and chaos, because there be dragons one side and tyranny the other

[@B3YOND-D_Grav3]

Lol Ezio auditore in assassin creed revelation brought up the very thing you're saying when he explained the assassin Creed

[@phillipcontreras720]

I continue to be very glad I'm subscribed and watch each video you make. Thank you.

[@carlstrunz2580]

I think there might be a fine line between self-care and self-improvement, in a way self improvement plays wonderfully into the noliberlist logic, if you fail in this system it is just your fault, you need to get better, clean your room, do workouts, meditate, become valuable in a way turn yourself into a more valuable product in the job market and love market. However self-care could mean realizing how damaging the capitalist individualist ways of living in this world are even to your own (social-) health and the wellbeing of humanity on this planet. In a way a revolutionary movements (like the Zapatistas f.e.) can be seen as acts of radical collective (self-)care, however that may be to let go of an individual notion of the self as a personal project and see it more as a product of a web of social and societal relations: a sociological view of self? What would it mean to care for such a social self? just some thoughts on the matter. cheers.

[@umbertopaoluccipierandrei1503]

Grazie.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Thanks umberto 🙏

[@Oreo-s1f]

Walk in a middle. The more opposites are incorporated and seen as being one , the more balanced life it seems.

[@brreezy421]

The Middle Way baby

[@miguelatkinson]

Taoism

[@christophmahler]

"incorporated" _integrated_

[@n8works]

Thanks!

[@elizabethmansfield3609]

Not to detract from the very interesting points you make … but … I use the term self-actualisation in the sense of the psychologist Abraham Maslow, which, in my understanding, has nothing to do with wellness or worldly appearance or advancement. In fact, the burning need to realise some deep inner potential, to solve some problem you have set yourself or develop an idea or artistic expression the best you can do, often conflicts with self-care, if only because you are too busy thinking about your poem or your maths problem or … or .. to eat or you need to follow some artistic process to its end instead of sleeping. If you have the “gift” of being a self-actualiser then there is always some more potential to explore, and it has nothing to do with narcissism in the sense of needing to feel better than other people or abusing other people to control them to be superior to them. It also has nothing to do with presenting a “self” in the sense of a persona to the world. Anyway. :)

[@SilasPath]

Yes to this. And both sides of the political spectrum want to improve themselves or their tribes standing in the world. And improving their tribe is related to self improvement anyways.

[@theGuilherme36]

I’m always surprised by people who says are studying neoliberalism, but don’t study any author who declared himself “neoliberal”.

[@yvindlind3223]

Loved this one! Have you considered doing any videos with a primary focus on Simone de Beauvoir? This video made me think about "the ethics of ambiguity" in particular.

[@AlmostEthical]

There is not really a "mania" about clean eating, rather a visceral realisation that corporations place profit over healthfulness after a rather intense period in hospital. Food manufacturers add various carcinogens (cheap), and the issues are then covered up by a complicit media and even regulators.

[@CrowMagnum]

When you use such broad categories of groups of people and their values, beliefs, and behaviors it becomes meaningless. Similarly with the use of self-actualization as if all such practices were equivalently self-centered. Any teachings on personal development should encourage considering the perspectives of others, building relationships and community, identifying and letting go of bias and false beliefs, and engaging with the world with honesty and compassion. Otherwise, if it is only focused on self control and "achievement" then it is just narcissistic masturbation. Self control and achievement matter, but they certainly are not everything, and if you frame the other areas of life solely in those terms then you are going to make quite a mess of things.

[@time8871]

There have been serious societal problems for thousands of years, look how many brilliant minds have come and gone during this span of time that have not been able to change the over-all nature of the world very significantly. We are going through a process. One might argue that the height of narcissism and pretentiousness are those who think they control anything and are going to change the world. This aside if one is desirous of seeing a positive change there are concrete, specific causal factors that could to be changed in order for that to happen, things like the banking system and the monopolization of the media, the school systems, the military racket. Most people that talk politically either try to mend little insignificant things within this mass of corruption or instead try to tackle more abstract and essentially unsolvable problems like racism and sexism. These things can never be proven to be solved. They only function to further divide. Both the left and right side of the political spectrum are symbolic of kinds of brain imbalance, and the solution will never be found by analyzing things in this way. All of us must go through a myriad of experiences including suffering, there is no way around that. As Jung said there is no coming to consciousness without pain. And since you brought up J Krishnamurti, another of his quotes seems fitting: "I don't mind what happens. That is the essence of inner freedom. It is a timeless spiritual truth: release attachment to outcomes, deep inside yourself, you'll feel good no matter what." We have little control of world events and there is no point in worrying about what is not in our control. Anyone calling this desperate narcissism, without having the intelligence, or courage to discuss root causal factors of corruption, is not offering much of value. I just see posturing, virtue signaling and silly jargon.

[@christophmahler]

"try to tackle more abstract and essentially unsolvable problems like racism and sexism." Intersectionalism is a ruse - it used to be called 'tokenism' until the generation who demanded wages that adapt to inflation has died out.

[@time8871]

@@christophmahler Intersectionalism aside my point stands. Hypothetically speaking if racism and sexism ever did go away, there would be no way to prove it. They are concepts that can be used forever by the establishment as long as they see them as useful. They can be used as distractions from concrete corrupt actions that people can do something tangible to correct. Making these concepts a focal point is very advantageous to those who wish to wield power because they are useful in dividing people, while simultaneously creating the illusion that the establishment is caring and very concerned with correcting these social problems. I think it is a fairly obvious Machiavellian strategy to get people confused and arguing with each other, while root causal factors continue on unhindered. These are just my thoughts, they don't come from Intersectionalism or any specific ideology.

[@christophmahler]

@@time8871 "These are just my thoughts, they don't come from Intersectionalism or any specific ideology." You may want to read up on the term in question as I have addressed it not to oppose Your valid observations, but in agreement. It is always useful if one understands the parlor of one's opponent in order to pick up on it with sound argument.

[@time8871]

@@christophmahler Good point. The only time I've come across the term was when someone was using it to refute the idea of privilege based just on race or sex because there are so many other intersecting factors related to privilege such as wealth, age, attractiveness etc. That was what caused the confusion on my part, but you're right of course.

[@christophmahler]

@@time8871 "you're right" Thanks. It is noteworthy, indeed that 'lookism' - physical attractiveness - is not integrated into 'intersectionalism' as either 'all women are beautiful' or others are INCELS... arguably another hint that 'intersctionalism' isn't a sincere concept of oppression or hardship, but a convenient diversion from common material interests and thus a means for division through fragmented identity.

[@Kestrel-777]

Whenever I read an article like of Penny's it takes an additional effort just to translate the jargon and alien mode of thinking into something undertandable. Then, of course, you still need to try to follow the substance of the article in the way that the author most likely intended. If I had to give just one complaint it would be that there are too many buzzwords per paragraph.

[@_7.8.6]

Victimhood has become an organising principle

[@bettyboohadapoo]

Mahatma Gandhi remarked that, there is nothing you can do to change the world one little bit, but don't let that stop you.

[@michaelmcclure3383]

Yeah, that's a basic of karma yoga as taught in the Gita. You have the freedom to act, but the results will be according to cosmic law, or the will of the whole.. You have no control over them, but you're free to act however you like. It's definitely a wise attitude I think, its free of enmity and hate, because ultimately you're not the doer and either is the other. Simple.

[@SpiritualPsychotherapyServices]

Who is Mahatma Gandhi?

[@christophmahler]

As a lesser sidenote: the thumbnail of Caspar David Friedrich's 'Wanderer above the Sea of Fog' (1818) suggests somehow a trope of individualistic 'Cocooning' - when it actually symbolizes the 'awe' within the alienated individual when confronted with the 'sublime' of an uncultivated wilderness. It is an example of historic irony that this painting became an early 'meme' of Nazi Germany since 1939 - revised as esoterically 'looking back unto national and personal achievement' of which Friedrich would have been completely unaware when finishing the work around the end of horrible Napoleonic Wars, with a Prussian princely state barely surviving and emancipating from enlightened French rule, with a student generation barely exploring it's wartime experiences of national identity, soon to be muffled again by an Austrian police state and international pentarchy. Otto von Bismarck - who would become an incarnation of a spirit of self-assertion along liberal national sentiments - would be just three years old at the last brush stroke... And this substantial misconception and misuse of our cultural legacy in order to gain short lived public attention, characterizes the state of affairs across all areas. Since we hardly know, how to speak in factual context, any longer, we also have little to say to another.

[@venkataponnaganti]

Liminality as you said sometime ago. Your thinking started me to become aware of the other side more than ever before.🙏

[@iParadoxify]

Thought-provoking as always!

[@Devon686]

Loved the video! Just showing some support.

[@chdao]

I believe that in order to help the world, we have to help ourselves first. How can I help you, if I cannot even get off the couch? Call it self-care or whatever you want. I just think of it as making sure that I am as healthy and strong as possible in order to be of the most benefit to others for the longest period of time possible. How can I help them if I am sick, depressed and weak? It is not narcissism if you use it to help others. But it is also not helpful, if I don't choose my battles wisely. Look for where you can leverage your abilities to achieve the best outcome. William Douglas Horden has a great book called, The Spiritual Basis of Good Fortune: Retracing the Ancient Path of Personal Transformation. In it there is a chapter on the 6 types of impasse helping you see how to get results and avoid backlash. He has a lot of other good books, too, btw.

[@azirious666]

Everything is prone to entropy and corruption normal or not

[@Havre_Chithra]

The mere acceptance of a debate carries with in an implicit ackowledgement and validation of the opposing position.

[@michaelmcclure3383]

Debate is a less evolved form of dialogue..

[@christophmahler]

"The mere acceptance of a debate carries with in an implicit ackowledgement and validation of the opposing position." Correct. And that is why one looses all credibility when refusing to negotiate pragmatic compromise and yet failing to take up arms for conclusive civil war - it can't be both unless there is a consolatory price for 'wailing, pretty'.

[@climaksy1659]

damn, all I am saying is; A fascist could say the same thing.

[@michaelmcclure3383]

@@climaksy1659 it's interesting the history of debate, its definitely not something exclusive to enlightenment thinking or even the Greeks. I was looking at the Indian tradition, for example early Buddhism and its debates with the dualist schools and later with the non dualists, there were also logicians and materialists who engaged in debate and there are plenty of written accounts of all of that.

[@christophmahler]

The issue with Mordechai's secular utopian fanatics is their notorious inability to recognize themselves within the historical process, realistically. Taking e.g. the comparison with the Roman Empire in civil war: one must learn to fight - and die - in formation in order to seize the 'commanding heights of the state' - instead of just agitating the less than 10 percent of academically accomplished bourgeois intelligentsia - and it's imitating middle class drop outs - who can't hold up a factual conversation beyond the restraints of doctrinal dogma - who thus can't _inspire_ the masses with eloquent public speech. Aside Nero there was a Vespasian, a mere mule trader who crushed the fierce national and religious rebellion of the Jews and who stabilized the Roman state that was fragmented by no less than four pretender emperors - founding the Flavian dynasty, after horrible civil wars, a legacy of Roman Peace. Without 'self-actualization' - that is discipline in mind and body, Vespasian would have failed to navigate the battlefield and politics - he wouldn't have been able to _inspire_ the confidence in his armed men to achieve what others must have regarded as already practically impossible. He wasn't the only one who would rise to that level of challenge in the following centuries - but he certainly was a model for the validity of exercise of virtue in order to accumulate power and to use it for maintaining the peace. And that is the thing: the Political Left doesn't advocate for anarchy - e.g. to be just left alone by the state and it's interest groups in order to engage in subsistence farming in quiet - they mean to preserve the state and to use it to order the life of all as a 'Commonwealth' - yet, they wish to do so, solely by arousing the masses to cheer for it, without _EVER_ producing a candidate who will be up to the titanic task. Instead they form committees and 'soviets', muddling their personal responsibility, and jealously guarding their exclusive circle against heterodox views - and as such don't offer anything else than what is already in power: an 'Optimate' Senate of landed gentry and fiscal 'knights' - whose patronizing Patrician families and clients are elected, again and again and again... That is why Socialists die upon barricades or in camps while 'Sullan' fascists fire into crowds or watch over them from towers - as if this confirmation of material structure were meant to be - as if there is more to a Dialectic of History than just a general utopian 'progress'.

[@Mbonic]

5:06 bro casually drops the hardest quote in recent memory

[@Steve-ng6jf]

Like myself you spend a lot of time and effort kicking the shit out of accepted beliefs. Why? I'll tell you. The commonality we share in this life is the Mystery, not the "knowing". Once that is admitted, the pressure to be Right disappears and we are all family on the path.

[@TheLasTBreHoN]

Exactly 💯 Make America Great Again!

[@mccluskeytom]

Hi Living, another great video. Re: the misery, Nietzsche says that to hold something in contempt is to idealise it as something worthy of contempt. Anyway... would you be interested in getting involved in philosophy salons around Dublin? A friend of mine suggested it and I thought of your channel. There wouldn't be anything happening until near the end of the year. Maybe you do this kind of thing already.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Interesting stuff I’d love to hear more about. Any chance you could send me an email about it or tell me where I could find out more? I’d love to start something like that in limerick as well

[@mccluskeytom]

@@TheLivingPhilosophy it's a very tentative idea suggested by a friend but I think it has great potential. Gap in the market / needed service. I immediately thought of you. I'll keep you posted. BTW, random but I think we got talking at Castlepalooza music festival years ago. You wouldn't remember it but suffice to say we were both incredibly sound.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

@@mccluskeytom well let me know I'm well curious! As for Castlepalooza while it does sound like us I never went (big crowds and me don't mix too well!) so I'm glad my doppelgangers out there are behaving well!

[@Axumanon]

Quite interesting.

[@TalaAtTanagra]

The leftists around you must be completely different from those around me, cuz this does not describe them in the slightest. Rather, the differentiation should be that the leftists (I know, and therefore a potentially broader sample) care deeply about self-care and self-actualization, and view it as parallel to addressing systemic problems. There's no reason we can't work on both at the same time.

[@gabrielsaavedra7916]

Hey Living Philosophy, what’s your current opinion of Ken Wilber and the AQAL map. Because of the ‘Knowledge of Everything’ video which i saw last month, it got me down a rabbit hole of spiral dynamics and different interpretations of it. That video was 2 years ago though, has any thoughts on it changed? So far it’s been changing my life, but i want to know if there’s any warnings, traps or pitfalls i should look out for.

[@michaelmcclure3383]

I know James is fond of spiral dynamics as a general map. I found it interesting that the guardian journalist he mentioned is part of a leftist way of thinking that has lost faith in the inevitability of evolution.. Something you definitely find in Hegelian thought, which Marx and spiral dynamics supports. I say the reason for this is simply because they have cut down the very idea of growrh hierarchies and I think I probably just picked that up from Ken Wilber, because he says that's symptomative of postmodernist (green) thinking. Metamodernism I,think tries to incorporate the modernist sense of evolution that was a big part of the old left as well as the critical elements of postmodernism. We've been talking about the spiral in terms of the inevitability of collective evolution, but spiral dynamics is of course used as a kind of map for self actualisation too.. Second tier being an integral, 'actualised' phase of the spiral, no longer impelled so much by reactivity and survival concerns, but centred in being and acting from that. So maybe there is something to be said about it in terms of collective and individual evolution as well.

[@michaelmcclure3383]

I know James is fond of spiral dynamics as a general map. I found it interesting that the guardian journalist he mentioned is part of a leftist way of thinking that has lost faith in the inevitability of evolution.. Something you definitely find in Hegelian thought, which Marx and spiral dynamics supports. I say the reason for this is simply because they have cut down the very idea of growrh hierarchies and I think I probably just picked that up from Ken Wilber, because he says that's symptomatic of postmodernist (green) thinking. Metamodernism i think tries to incorporate the modernist sense of evolution that was a big part of the old left as well as the critical elements of postmodernism. We've been talking about the spiral in terms of the inevitability of collective evolution, but spiral dynamics is of course used as a kind of map for self actualisation too.. Second tier being an integral, 'actualised' phase of the spiral, no longer impelled so much by reactivity and survival concerns, but centred in being and acting from that. So maybe there is something to be said about it in terms of the interface of collective and individual evolution.

[@aaronlatif52]

Maybe instead of focusing on tearing down what others build people could you know go find a system that is closest to their vision and go support that or create their own. I get there is war and espionage but like these arent a USA and capitalist issue - the vacuum left behind will create more meddling and opportunity for others. So yeah I mean keep fighting your fight but your utopia isnt coming. All this effort could be going into tech, medical research, arts, communities, and familiy/relationships. Self actualizing goes beyond the individual and actually materializes the individuals potential into the collective. Now I might argue that materialism isnt enough for the soul but I think self actualizing is connecting to ones soul and hopefully that builds a culture of that is shared amoungs ones friends, family, neighbors, and colleagues - its been my experience and its allowed me more opportunity to fix things that bug me and I dislike -> so to go full circle the revolution is not off the table when self actualizing either.... The left just isnt humble enough to recognize that and take responsibility for their own failures.

[@hast3033]

"And individual patients struggling with self-knowledge are so convinced by the fictions of childhood because they are Oedipus who finds who he is by finding out about his infancy, its wounds and abandonment. The entire massive apparatus of counseling, social work, developmental psychology-therapy in every form- continues rehearsing the myth, practicing the play in its practices. If health is the primary value in a psychology informed by the fantasy of medicine, then in a psychology of image and eros the primary value is beauty. The soul does not need to be free of symptoms, It doesn't require that life be lived perfectly. Something other than the soul finds virtue hygienic living and successful relationships and life strategies. What soul needs and craves is the experience of the world, taking it in as it presents itself."

[@OrigenisAdamantios]

Self actualization is impossible without the unmoved mover.

[@christophmahler]

"Self actualization is impossible without the unmoved mover." Well said.

[@ignamagan]

The world has always been mad. You have to accept that; end of story.

[@prodbyed4549]

The brain created Philosophy, Religion, Science, Society, Politics, etc. As ways to survive. It's fascinating all that we've been able to accomplish. When I study the brain, the world opens up a little more. A lot of these conversations become pointless in a way. It makes absurdism more and more real. To me at least.

[@santerisatama5409]

Doing some linguistic archeology in my native language by reading etymological dictionary, the Finnish word for self ('itse') carries also the older and/or deeper meaning layer 'shadow'. The meaning of self-transformation can be radically contrarian to and contradictory to the meaning of self-actualization as self-care, and care as narcissistic identity-fixation with "self-image" that is basically just a social mask aka "person". Transformation is a movement, a dynamic relation. The actualization of a shadow moving involves at least a source of light, the movement of a plus-dimensional form blocking some of the rays of light and a minus-dimensional surface demonstrating the contrast of light and shadow. Is some part of this dynamical mereological relating the "self", and others "non-self"? Some identity-fixations might suggest so. On the other hand, we can remember and accept that the main purpose of Plato's Academy, where the second schorarchos after Plato was master mathematician Eudoxus of Knidus, was dedicated to the Protean geometric art of intuitive self-transformation. For example, in order to see a plane as line, a mathematician needs to change her perspective (ie. a form of bodily awareness) to that of a minus-dimensional flatlander for a duration of an intuitive geometric contemplation. Rigidly fixed identities as mathematical subjects of deeply alienated mathetical administration of centralized bureaucracies of class society have mostly lost the Protean geometric art and ability of philosophy so deeply that even top rate professors of mathematics generally fail to comprehend that second definition of Euclids Elementa "A line is breadthless length." contains a thundering silence that does NOT deny that line has a depth. Self-Transformative geometry is not just theoretical perception of animated shadow-projections of geometric forms, it's participatory praxis of constructive processes in the context of Coherence theory of truth, construction of mathematical poetry such as Elementa in which every definition, demand, common notion and proposition is participatory constructive process of a harmonious coherent whole of cosmological mathematical Beauty. The Sophrosyne of mathematical sense of dynamically participatory holistic mereology in which every momement and change in a part moves and changes also the whole which includes each and every unique part. The responsibility that comes with such self-transformative liberty in a Plato's Cave is terrifying, and justly so.

[@theonetruetim]

Brilliant

[@theonetruetim]

Self awareness vs self importance [is not as clean a binary scheme as it may seem....] & - working it out ain't for everyone

[@simont.b.2660]

A nudge to the algorythms.

[@downtownjb100]

Striking a balance becomes the impossible task in this day and age

[@brreezy421]

It's hard to take Laurie Penny seriously

[@matheusdecastrocarvalho5370]

Weirdly I commented about late capitalism in your last video

[@JohnnyAngel777]

A wise man once said, *_"Never date a woman named Hope."_*

[@saqlainsajid1274]

I really like your content man You should cover John Vervaeke He explains how we always fall into self deception But just when I do fall into deception you drop a video explaining exactly where I am wrong

[@rugbyperson15]

I've been a long time subscriber and have watched most of your videos. In these last few years I've come to realize and accept the God-shaped hole in all of us which isn't filled by the incoherent gnostic god of Jung or by the gods of so many others. Only by Jesus Christ.

[@jacob_massengale]

so what are you going to do in the mean time?

[@huguettebourgeois6366]

I am not sure about the queer community - by the way happy for your insight! it never ends - we get more and more - keep searching, reding and thinking. Cheers!!!!

[@Rithmy]

I mean you portait very "radial" edges of the spectrum. Of course the conclusion ends up beeing the middle path. But thats besides the point: Your thoughts on that are inspiring. Mostly because of how you view righht and left. In my own social circle i perceive the leftists as trying to push for self care. They want to live the utopia now instead of desring a far away dream. They want to inspire others into action. They feel inspired by rojava, Zapistas or other movements. They increasing ask the question (why do so many activists burn out? What ist sustainable activism??? This is basically the mindsset of the medic: "A sick medic is unable to heal." First i need to know my capacities and respect them, only then im only to continuously heal others. On that note this reminds me of one ARTE Video about a psychiatrists life. He has way to much work. And at the end of the video there is like a 15 min talk with him and his collegue where they discusse the use of their work. THey ask "Am i just preserving this sick system?" "Is my work just delaying the downfall?". In a way those in charge see that the psychiatrist is doing extremly good work. Thats why they cut the jobs, because he can do they work for 2. They don't care for his wellbeing. His competence enables further exploitation. The irony is that he strove for competence to battle exploitation.

[@Olivergibbons]

lucifer’s desperate narcissism 😿

[@MasterfulPotato]

Wow, such beautiful hair.

[@juanantonio3704]

I know that feel bro

[@RichInk]

Welcome to neoliberalism on left and right. I recommend reading Zygmunt Bauman on the subject. Blew me away in the earlier 2000s.

[@Kraflyn]

dude... intensive!!!!!! :D

[@FirstRisingSouI]

As someone who puts tremendous effort into self-improvement and work toward self-actualization, and is socially, politically, and economically to the left, this video falls rather flat to my experience.

[@suneasmussen2650]

Hmm... I don't exactly disagree, but don't we often run make the category error of conflating true humility based self-care with narcissistic mimetic pseudo self-care (which is really the one I hear you talk about here)? isd it not the case that beyond the egoic dualist illusion that the world is something out there, that we are somehow apart from, lies the deeper truth that we ARE the world? And of so is truly caring for yourself not in fact is caring for the world?

[@SilasPath]

Came to this channel because of your 4 quadrant video. Decided to check your latest out. Where the 4 quadrant concept is evergreen, a video like this is likely to be forgotten about within a few years. I had hoped to see more videos focused on refining and updating Ken’s ideas for people who want to improve themselves. Sure “leftists” et al will cry about the fact that some people want to mature, but I don’t give a fuck. I think your tribe doesn’t care either.

[@ozlemgundogdu721]

Not many of your videos put people in defense mode. Almost no one agrees with you on this subject, and I am surprised that I do. Maybe this is because I was brought up in the collectivist society of the East. Also, I don't see any call for revolution unlike most of the people. I share your perspective on this criticism and would like to hear more about solutions if you have some.

[@moorbilt]

Wouldn’t a revolution require the so called individual to not bother trying to be anything? Instead of doing the wars, or the jobs, the success, etc. you were instead a source of health and peace.

[@asgmto]

Miserable people with visibility infect regular people who consume their content, just like the elites shape the behaviour of their subordinates. Example comes from the top. Stop intellectualizing your misery, stop putting your identity into boxes and fearing how you will be judged, become who you really are, let go of concepts and prejudices, and live life accepting your fate. Ciao

[@jfder3677]

Wow. As someone who considers themselves aligned with progressive political values, I am now not sure if I like myself.

[@RandomPerson28337]

How long are you going to milk this one topic have you nothing interesting to contribute then reading generic info you found on wiki?

[@asgmto]

Consider reading Siddhartha and reflecting about what Govinda represents. He is the one constantly looking for himself outside. He would be on the internet and leaning on intellectual traditions to have an identity instead of making the spiritual journey of abandoning the world and finally knowing who he really is. Intellectuals have this problem: everything they do is based on another person's ideas, but when it comes a time to step into the world, things become more complicated.

[@SK-gc7xv]

False dichotomy.

[@mikejarrells431]

Wow. That was a word salad. My understanding of narcissism from a psychological perspective doesn't mean self indulgent (self actualization). It means manipulative. It sounds like someone is trying to manipulate others to act using shame & guilt. Sometimes removing oneself from the situation is the best option. Leading thinkers (Dr Ramani) suggests that you can't force others to change. She actually argues that our goal should be authenticity (self actualization). It's the old fight or flight question. Should we kill all of the people killing our planet (fight) or focus on inspiring change by leading good lives (flight?)? I'd prefer to see global governance instead of the current lawless system we inherited (nation state international order). Let's unite as a species so we can focus on big problems (climate change & space exploration) instead of fighting amongst ourselves (US versus China, Russia, Iran, Palestine, etc.). We seem to be moving in that direction (International Criminal Court prosecuting Israel for genocide). We deserve better. We got this. Let's go!

[@oopsiedoopsie647]

Loved this channel for a long time but yikes. Opening with being a centrist who's never properly analysed leftist works then spending the rest of the video pretending to understanding that perspective while getting pretty much everything wrong is pretty pathetic. I trust in a few years you'll make a video criticising your views in this one, but wow. I hope it doesn't take that long.

[@annebomba]

I always saw the leftists as the individualistic ones that adapted to the toxic world. They all believe in liberalism, which is fundamentally individualistic, they love all the modern trends like abstract shitty art, they are all utilitarians, materialists. Everyone always says that the lives of leftists suck, but in my view they have it way better. They have social dominance, the government has been doing what they want for decades, they don't really look unhappy to me, just like spoiled children that can't control their emotions. But they've got everything they need to be happy. Right wingers on the other hand believe in collectives like nations, peoples, cultures, they don't adapt to the degeneracy and evil of the government and modern culture but call it out, find alternatives. Also they are socially shunned, called names, they're kept out of social AND political dominance, nobody listens to them and nobody wants to listen to them. I've always been a right winger, but maybe I was a right winger with a leftist mindset. More and more I grow disillusioned with the right wing, because more of them are outing themselves as individualists, liberals, etc, but still there are so many that understand what humans truly need, truly feel compassion, truly love. The best of the left lives on in the right in my opinion. I don't get why people never see this.

[@oopsiedoopsie647]

Listening to Chapo Trap House or CumTown would give you a better idea of what leftism is than this video. Very disappointed.

[@Havre_Chithra]

Can we stop pretending everything is worth a debate or even engaging with? The only reason any of this shit works is because people react to it. Any reaction whatsoever is a mistake in most cases.

[@InventiveHarvest]

Late stage capitalism is when an economu becomes overburdened by regulation. It has a lot more to do with socialism than free market capitalism.

[@copleysq]

Incompetent.

[@jacob_massengale]

wow I just realized the comments still have the dislike button