The Four Quadrants: A Map of All Knowledge and Human Experience

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Love the channel? Love supporting things? Check out the Patreon page: 💸 Patreon: patreon.com/thelivingphilosophy ⌛ Timestamps: 0:00 Introduction: A Map of Reality 01:44 What are the four quadrants? 2:34 Q1 - Internal Individual 3:09 Q2 - External Individual 4:22 Q3 - Internal Collective 7:07 Q4 - External Collective 9:00 As a map of knowledge 11:27 As defuser of intellectual conflicts

[@ricardosantos6721]

maybe if you have a speech disability don't narrate shit?

[@ReverendDr.Thomas]

Of all eight thousand million persons currently residing on this planet, you are undoubtedly the MOST holy, wise and enlightened of them all, Sir! So obviously, you are VEGAN, since it would be extremely incongruous for a great sage such as yourself to be an animal-abusing criminal, correct? 😁

[@ricardosantos6721]

@@ReverendDr.Thomas I am vegetarian, but not vegan, because all vegetarian things can be produced without causing suffering, being vegan is like not using words, because others use words in order to cause suffering, it's pompous and pretentious, unless vegan is someone's actual taste. I'm not sure what does that have to do with this comment section though.

[@ReverendDr.Thomas]

@@ricardosantos6721 The term "VEGAN" refers to the philosophy of avoiding undue harm to any animal life, as far as practical, whilst "vegetarian" is merely someone who consumes a plant-based diet. Therefore, veganism is NOT a diet but a moral or ethical position against animal exploitation of any kind. 🌱 So, you ADMIT that you’re an animal-abusing criminal, Mr. Cow-teat-suckler? 😬🙄😬

[@luciebellest2225]

hello!

[@eternal___official]

This must be the FIRST time I've ever watched anyone trying to be as objective as they can be, trying to combine different perceptions and find the separate truths of each viewpoint while attempting to integrate them in a respectful way!

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Haha that's a good way of putting it Eternal! It's something that always stuck with me from Wittgenstein - combining snapshots to form the fullest sketch of the truth which is the closest we will get - the more perspectives the better (if we can organise them of course)

[@randykandle8622]

I appreciate objectivity and care put into this presentation. My first experience with his work. Subscribed.

[@ReverendDr.Thomas]

🐟 03. CONCEPTS Vs THE TRUTH: The term “TRUTH” (“satyam”, “tathya”, “tattva”, or “siddhānta”, in Sanskrit) is one of the most greatly-misused words in the English tongue. Anything that has ever been written or spoken, by even the greatest sage or Avatar (incarnation of Divinity), including every single postulation within this Holiest of Holy Scriptures, “F.I.S.H”, is merely a CONCEPT and not “The Truth”, at least in the Absolute sense of the term. A concept is either accurate or inaccurate. Virtually all concepts are inaccurate to a degree. However, some concepts are far more accurate than others. For example, the personal conception of Ultimate Reality (God or The Goddess) is inaccurate to a large extent (see Chapter 07). The concept of Ultimate Reality being singular (“All is One”) is far more accurate. The transcendence of BOTH the above concepts (non-duality) is excruciatingly accurate. However, none of these concepts is “The Truth” as such, since all ideas are relative, whilst The Truth is Absolute. A BELIEF is an unhealthy and somewhat problematic relationship one has with a certain concept, due to misapprehension of life as it is, objectively-speaking. Attachment to beliefs, particularly in the presumption of individual free-will, is the cause of psychological suffering. It is VITALLY important to distinguish between relative truth and Absolute Truth. Relative truth is temporal, mutable, subjective, dependent, immanent, differentiated, conditioned, finite, complex, reducible, imperfect, and contingent, whilst Absolute Truth is eternal, immutable, objective, independent, transcendent, undifferentiated, unconditional, infinite, non-dual (i.e. simple), irreducible, perfect, and necessary. Absolute Truth is the ground of all being (“Brahman”, in Sanskrit), and is prior to any mind, matter, name, form, intent, thought, word, or deed. Good and bad are RELATIVE - what may be good or bad can vary according to temporal circumstances and according to personal preferences. For example, there is absolutely no doubt that citrus fruits are a good source of nutrients for human beings. However, it may be bad to consume such beneficial foods when one is experiencing certain illnesses, such as chronic dysentery. ‘One man's food is another man's poison.' Because of the relative nature of goodness, anything that is considered to be good must also be bad to a certain degree, since the extent of goodness is determined by the purpose of the object in question. As demonstrated, citrus fruits can be either good or bad, depending on its use. Is drinking arsenic good or bad? Well, if one wishes to remain alive, it is obviously bad, but for one who wants to die, it is obviously good. However, beyond the dichotomy of good and bad, is the Eternal Truth, which transcends mundane relativism. Therefore, the accomplishment of life is to rise above the subjective “good” and “bad”, and abide in the transcendental sphere. A qualified spiritual preceptor is able to guide one in the intricacies of such transcendence. Such a person, who has transcended mundane relative truth, is said to be an ENLIGHTENED soul. When making moral judgements, it is more appropriate to use the terms “moral”, “amoral”, or “immoral”, rather than “good/bad” or “right/wrong”. As the Bard of Avon so rightly declared in the script for one of his plays, there is nothing that is INTRINSICALLY either good or bad but “thinking makes it so”. At the time of writing (early twenty-first century), especially in the Anglosphere, most persons seem to use the dichotomy of “good/evil” rather than “good/bad” and “holy/evil”, most probably because they consider that “holiness” is exclusively a religious term. However, the terms “holy” and “righteous” are fundamentally synonymous, for they refer to a person or an act that is fully in accordance with pure, holy, and righteous principles (“dharma”, in Sanskrit). So a holy person is one who obeys the law of “non-harm” (“ahiṃsā”, in Sanskrit), and as the ancient Sanskrit axiom states: “ahiṃsā paramo dharmaḥ” (non-violence is the highest moral virtue or law), and “ahiṃsā param satyam” (non-violence is the highest truth). See the Anuśāsana Parva of “Mahābhārata”, 13.117.37-38. The ONLY Real Truth in the phenomenal manifestation is the impersonal sense of being, that is, the sense of “I am” (“aham”, in Sanskrit). Everything else is merely transient and unreal (“unreal” for that very reason - because it is ever-mutating, lacking permanence and stability). This sense of quiddity is otherwise called “Infinite Awareness”, “Spirit”, “God”, “The Ground of Being”, “Necessary Existence“, “The Higher Self”, as well as various other epithets, for it is the very essence of one’s being. Chapters 06 and 10 deal more fully with this subject matter. Of course, for one who is fully self-realized and enlightened, the subject-object duality has collapsed. Therefore, a fully-awakened individual does not perceive any REAL difference between himself and the external world, and so, sees everything in himself, and himself in everything. If it is true that there are none so blind as those who don’t WANT to see, and none so deaf as those who don’t WANT to hear, then surely, there are none so ignorant as those who don’t WANT to learn the truth. Obviously, in the previous sentence, and in most other references to the word “truth” within this book, it is meant “the most accurate concept possible”, or at least “an extremely accurate fact”. For example, as clearly demonstrated in Chapters 21 and 22, it is undoubtedly “true” (accurate) that a divinely-instituted monarchy is the most beneficial form of national governance, but that is not the Absolute Truth, which is the impersonal, never-changing foundation of all being. So, to put it succinctly, all “truths” are relative concepts (even if they are very accurate) but the Universal Self alone is REAL (Absolute) Truth. “In the absence of both the belief ‘I am the body’ and in the absence of the belief that ‘I am not the body’, what is left is what we really are. We don’t need to define what we really are. We don’t need to create a thought to tell us what we are. What we are is what TRUTH is." ************* “God is not something ‘out-there, looking-in’, but God (or Source) has BECOME all of This. So, God is the Underlying Principle of all of this - the Energy or the Consciousness. The (psycho-physical) manifestation has arisen within Consciousness as an imagination in the mind of Source.” Roger Castillo, Australian Spiritual Teacher, 15/07/2015. “I am the TRUTH...” “...and the TRUTH shall set you free”. Lord Jesus Christ, John 14:16 and 8:32.

[@nickgivesomeinfos8230]

thats the m goal for me

[@Alejandroredgear]

We need to hang out like minded. Individuals. The ones who are wierd are the most interesting 🧐

[@mr.feeney1582]

This past summer, I went through an existential crisis. A friend I hadn’t seen in YEARS reached out and actually gifted me Wilber’s Book - No Boundary. It’s been one of the best books I’ve read. I studied philosophy in Uni, and received my bachelors in 2020. Wilber’s book was some of the best philosophical material I had the pleasure of consuming. Highly recommend.

[@Soltuts]

Really great video. What facinates me is the dynamics between the individual and the collective, how our individual experiences are seemingly internal and exteral at the same time and all seem to cohere into some shared collective world or world view. Some people would even deny that an internal collective even exists.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

I know right! And I think that is the newest field to really be penetrated by consciousness. In many ways that work only seems to have begun in the 20th century. It's so hard to grasp and I think the reason for that is that it is still so new to consciousness, we still haven't planted enough flags in this domain to really feel good there. And with the people working in this quadrant we find that a lot of their is dismissed because it's not clear enough but to my mind that's just becuase they are the pioneers into new intellectual territory and just as the first pioneers into the farther reaches of consciousness obviously lacked accuracy definitely doesn't mean that their efforts should have been dismissed

[@ADHDMoneyandBusiness]

@@TheLivingPhilosophy I feel that the times our societies have spent primarily in SD Blue and Green are most focussed on Q3 over Q1. And amongst individuals, I see the bias of self-oriented & Thinker types tend towards Q1 whereas tribe-oriented & feeler types lean more to the collective Q3 (interesting that Feeling / valuing seems to draw upon collective wisdom in a memetic way, where as logical processing seems to emphasise the individual more strongly). So I suspect that Q3 is not so much novel, as it is lost. Which is why we're now (in our culture) refocusing on primitive (purple) cultures to reclaim a connection with the Q3 collective consciousness.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

@@ADHDMoneyandBusiness Dang that's absolutely fascinating Tristan. And actually you are spot on with Green and I guess with the Blue idea as well. I wonder then if it could be considered that the oscillation between the individualist side of the spiral and the tribal side of the spiral could then also be seen as an oscillation between the emphasis on the upper and the lower quadrants

[@ADHDMoneyandBusiness]

@@TheLivingPhilosophy I would agree with that. I think that mechanic explains the 'culture wars' quite effectively. And is a common and constant part of civilization - you could even expand on it to say that's what enables complex cultures to grow and evolve more rapidly (the increased friction, like iron on iron, or the battling of ideas). It's also sadly a large cause of great wars, and likely very strongly at play in Russia right now. But more personally, it plays out in marriage a lot, and amongst peer groups.. or philosophers.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

@@ADHDMoneyandBusiness Absolutely! I'm reading a lot of Foucult at the moment and he's talking about how war is the central mechanism for how culture evolves. Knowledge is (funnily enough with your choice of metaphor) the sparks that come off the sword - something entirely different to the iron of the swords that clash - and so the power evolves. It makes sense in the context of family, society and philosophy

[@doyle6000]

I was watching a Ken Wilbur interview and I came back here to understand him better before continuing!

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Thanks Dean! Was it the one with David Fuller? Glad this could be a resource for you

[@doyle6000]

@@TheLivingPhilosophy yes, exactly! Yes, thanks so much!

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

@@doyle6000 Ah good stuff. Not sure what Wilber was thinking with his hair in later videos but it's certainly distinctive and his chat makes up for it

[@daithiocinnsealach1982]

You mention going to a foreign county looking at a culture but not being inside of it. Looking at it as an outsider. For sure I spent most of my life as a sort of outsider in my own culture. And still to this day I feel like a bit of an outsider. I've never embraced patriotism, never made sense to me, and I spent 15 years seeking answers to life's big questions rather than just going with the flow of whatever my surrounding culture told me to think and do. I was even accused of having autism once. It's not that I can't engage, I can. It's that I chose not too for a variety of personal reasons involving multiple tragedies that left me feeling cold. I experienced first hand the brutality of my species and the coldness of an unemotional universe. We live in a world of dichotomies. Seemingly the ones screaming loudest about positivity and inclusion are only too willing to be negative and exclude those who disagree with them. We talk of human rights and protecting the vulnerable while we demonize those on the margins of our society and slaughter the unborn by the thousands in this country each year. We speak of animal rights and are appauled at a man kicking a dog but scoff down burgers and ribs by the truck loads. I've worked in slaughterhouses. I've seen the terror and misery those animals endure in their last moments. But we would almost turn the men who do the killing into national herpes because they preserve our lives. What people really seek is personal certainty and personal success but most are deeply confused and understand the issues they bark on about only at the most basic level. We create boogey men out of our enemies and heroes out of those who confirm our prejudices. The reality is a lot more mundane and also a lot scarier. Likened to the Holocaust it was a mundane daily activity of the grossest violence towards our own species we've ever seen in history. The Incas probably came close though. They incorporated human sacrifice into their daily lives and I'm pretty sure mothers went on loving their children and father's provided a living while they watched their fellow beings slaughtered by the thousands to appease the gods. I can't help but feel that in spite of our best efforts we are still deeply irrational creatures with the few of us trying extremely hard to make sense out of it all, and coming to differing conclusions and fighting each other over it...

[@jacekmiksza505]

Your intuition hasn't misled you. Culture is not our friend and there is no need to play along with it.

[@PrakashRaj-zq8uj]

wow thanks for taking the time to write this!

[@ReddUzi]

This is actually a great direction and motivation to learn. I always enjoy learning new things in general but since there’s so much in formation i couldn’t necessarily put the information into one big aspect. The four quadrants should be taught in schools that way students can choose which direction of knowledge they can dive into, and it makes learning everything feel more fulfilling.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

You're very right. I really wish this had been taught in school

[@LeZylox]

I think this should be thought in school, but not to go into one direction but to concider all of them while thinking

[@andersbech4377]

It is taught in some places (first semester for my bachelor of psychology in Denmark, the leader of the institute focused on wilberts quadrants in order to give us a better way to organise different viewpoints)

[@BIG-STANK]

They'll never teach any truth in school. They dont want anybody smarter than them and overthrowing the govt

[@Foshoo1]

I've long been aware that science has its limitations; the mind is more than just a composition of flesh, fat, and bones, and emotions extend beyond mere muscle and tissue. I understood that various philosophies address these aspects individually, but it now becomes clear that a comprehensive understanding requires a range of diverse philosophies, rather than a single unified theory. This perspective helps me appreciate the complexity of the human experience.

[@mauijttewaal]

The objective is an abstraction of the subjective, not the other way around;)

[@PlanetSaturnClub]

@planetsaturnclub

[@greekterr0ru-i13]

How can we be aware of something there is no evidence for?

[@homesicksatan9446]

@@mauijttewaal very well put, although at the same time, the subjective is an emergent property of the objective world therefore I think that we need both to reach a well rounded understanding of reality

[@mauijttewaal]

@homesicksatan9446 no that's just an idea that has no proper foundation

[@cygnus_zealandia]

This is such a good summary of Ken Wilber's lifetime of works in a mere 13 minutes. I first read one of his books in 1985 and have maintained an interest ever since then.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Ah wow thanks a million Richard that genuinely means a lot!

[@ReverendDr.Thomas]

Good and bad are RELATIVE. 😉 Incidentally, Slave, are you VEGAN? 🌱

[@prototropo]

With a meta-compliment, I have to compliment your KZbin handle! It exudes the grace of a nomen abstractum, rare in the intellectually demagnetized world of social media, where vulgarity is virtually a letter of introduction, an imperial emissary, an embossed professional card of less civilly roughshod times.

[@tuckerbugeater]

We'll all be vegan soon brother

[@macattack1958]

When I looked at clip I first thought it was a political compass before I read the title. Einstein as an authoritarian right winger. Freud as an authoritarian left winger. Nietzsche as a left libertarian. Marx as a right libertarian. It gave me a chuckle.

[@K-newborn]

libertarian left is nooooooot a thing. see mr irish men theyre racist, keep freud out yo mouth hes daddy to the surrealist who unfortunately claimed anarch socialist but died millionaires while members starved, where's my 3rd mansion bernie

[@K-newborn]

poser

[@Camicamisinho]

damn 😂

[@kryptoid2568]

me too

[@mietzdiekatz6501]

Funny because everyone is wrong

[@guntervanderwalt7649]

Wow. Just wow. I have always found my different pursuits of knowledge (biology and neuroscience to philosophy and mythology; more recently geopolitics and social justice) to be quite disparate from eachother. This, this one video made me understand which quadrants of knowledge I operate from, towards understanding the the whole. You have yourself an enthusiastic new subscriber!!

[@indranifausch4102]

Thank you for making Ken Wilber " bite size" to understand and digest. This is a fantastic video. Thank you and congratulations.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Thanks a million Indrani!

[@satyajitmajhi1406]

I was desprately in search of a Channel that could provide me with these kind of knowldge & intellectual based mental stimulation. & Now I Got It

[@axellind5036]

You know I wasn't sure what I was expecting to find here as it was just something handed in by algorithm but by God this is some good stuff! Sufficiently explains a model for dealing in knowledge quadrant by quadrant of what they are and some examples. Quality work! I hope you'll blow up someday since this is a fine video

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Haha delighted to hear it Axel and thank you for the kind words!

[@KamramBehzad]

I read about this in Wilber's books years ago. It's almost criminal that more people have never heard of it.

[@mrkipi8074]

Book name?

[@SumitSharma-hh9ww]

@@mrkipi8074 Watch the video, the author has already suggested 2 books. Theory of everything and Sex something, both by Ken Wilber.

[@eldonscott9]

Sex, Ecology, Spirituality… it’s a thrill to read.

[@psychosophy6538]

This is like the pinnacle of your work. All of your videos merging into one meta perspective. Speaking of meta, perhaps Ken Wilber is the core meta-modernist we need today?

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Thank you! The metamodernism of Hanzi Freinacht actually developed out of Wilber's work and I would even describe it as a secularising of Wilber's work in a more generally appealing and relevant form - though it's more focussed on the developmental part than it is on this map but yeah delighted you enjoyed it and it is indeed a great merging of all I've been talking about! It took a while to put it together but it was worth doing so to get it right!

[@dinocardamone-sg1ph]

I don't know, literally, how you take in all this stuff... everything you talk about on this channel, there is a limit to thinking...but you seem to live independent of it. That 'is' a compliment.

[@theharshtruthoutthere]

An easy search: BIBLE + FREEMASONRY, through which lies and truth becomes easy listed. So far i have listed 28 lies and 28 truth. Have you started to dig? What have you found? What do you know about masonry club? About the evil rulers of this world, masons, what you know about them?

[@kangakid5984]

The model reminds me of David Howe's Taxonomy of Social Work philosophy. Yes I think you are correct in saying they are useful in helping us to take a step back to see where in the scheme of thought a speaker is positioned. Very well explained. Thank you again.

[@peterlynley]

I got frustrated with Wilber when he started colour coding things and I moved on but this reminded me that the guy is an actual genius and his work will probably stand the test of time. Great graphics work BTW. It really helps.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Yes right! There's gold in his work for sure but yeah some of it just needs a bit of touching up or something. Thanks for noting the graphics I spent FAR more time than I intended working on them but I'm proud of how they turned out it definitely makes the information go down easier when it can be done right

[@_VISION.]

Why do you care so much about colors?

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

@@_VISION. It's a reference to another model that Wilber uses a lot called Spiral Dynamics which is a developmental model comparable to Foucault's Traditionalist/Modernist/Postmodernist sequence but with more stages of evolution before and after

[@_VISION.]

@@TheLivingPhilosophy I'm aware of what that is but what's the guys problem with it?

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

@@_VISION. ah I see. No idea. I wasn't too keen on wilber changing the colours after he fell out with Cowan but personally quite like the colour system in general so Peter will have to answer that himself

[@licausa]

What a gem I have found here! Thank you very much for this thought-provoking video, well done!

[@joebloggs339]

I read 10 of Wilber's books 20 years ago. He is the most brilliant author I've ever encountered. He claimed to write while in a non-dual state. His prose was spectacular. Genius and yet he isn't a household name

[@amgroblin5898]

I think another good example of a philosopher focused on Q3 that wasn't mentioned is Slavoj Zizek. His philosophy is primarily centered around what he calls ideology, the invisible force behind everything in our physical, exterior, and collective experiences, and how that invisible ideological force impacts, molds, and influences the individual. If I understood it correctly, Q3 seems to be observing exactly what Zizek comments on, hidden or concealed individual experiences that come as a product of the external world.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Ah good stuff! I was just reading an article by him this morning. I really enjoy the guy and am looking forward to learning more about him in future but as of now I still don't know enough to say where he fits so I appreciate the comment and it makes me want to study him all the more

[@amgroblin5898]

​@@TheLivingPhilosophy hes a great read! definitely puts something new on the table when it comes to philosophy and culture criticism--not just his ideas in themselves but the way in which he arrives at those ideas is totally mindboggling. every page makes you scream to yourself, "how could i be so dumb, this stuff has been right under my nose and i couldn't see it until now!". shilling for zizek aside, your video was amazing and one of the first videos ive actually given a thumbs up on in a good while. keep it up, good shit man :)

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

@@amgroblin5898 haha amazing!

[@μαριοςΚαπετανοπουλος]

If other videos are like this, I think I have found my new favourite channel. You tackle the most interesting topics, have clearly done great research while also having a calm manner about it. Many seem to be bitter when philosophy -politics-religion are on the line. But this video was very calm. Only new information to be absorbed. Awesome!

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Thank you! I would say that the production value on this one is higher and something I'll be striving for more in future. The tone seems to be the same though (or so I think anyway)

[@μαριοςΚαπετανοπουλος]

@@TheLivingPhilosophy Good enough for me. Hope your channel grows and your new videos do well!

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

@@μαριοςΚαπετανοπουλος Thanks a million!

[@future_beat]

My favourite subject from each quadrant: Q1: Zen Buddhism, Panentheism Q2: Extended Reality, AI Q3: Hip-Hop Culture Q4: Digital Revolution

[@Fiery_wings1]

How is general relativity a part of Individual system?

[@bingusiswatching6335]

​@@Fiery_wings1q2 is individual external

[@SurfinCeiba]

@@Fiery_wings1hmmm quantum mechanics?

[@SurfinCeiba]

Interesting as current trend in the digital revolution basically mutes the Q4 connection to the individual almost entirely

[@SurfinCeiba]

Although this comment is evidence to the contrary

[@thattimestampguy]

2:08 II, EI, IC, EC 2:48 Frued, Stoics, Buddhist, Husserel 4:42, 5:00 Instinct - We, Water, Worldview💧 5:32 Language’s Structure 6:37 Ends of Thought, Limits of Thought 💭 Limits of World Self - I, Me, Myself Brain 🧠 It Water 💧We, Culture 7:38 Exterior Collective 8:19 Outside background, -Intimate Interior- 9:01 Quadrants review 9:44 The Thinkers Mapped 11:44 Application of the Quadrants

[@nathanielbeha833]

I've been seeing you on so many philosophical videos. Didn't you time stamp the entirety of Thus Spoke Zarathustra?

[@lusterbug7003]

As I continue to make sense of this complex world, it helps to have the help from people that are different than I am, that are at different points in their lives, and that are trying to do the same. Great video!

[@GrantAce]

This is a great way to explain the four quadrants! I will say although that for anyone to fully grasp the full context of the quadrants, watch the whole video, as watching the whole video, "allows us to take a step back and to give a more balanced appraisal of the situation."

[@calpearson5992]

Ken Wilber’s ideas have profoundly influenced me. From The four quadrants, to “Spiral Dynamics” theory, and ego development, to his ‘6 minutes to enlightenment’ KZbin video, and non-dual philosophy. I always imagine the third axis from the base intersection of the four quadrants that the spiral dynamic development theory grows from, or the tree of Kabbalah grows in to the inner with its roots in the outer, or when considering an issue, spiraling around the quadrants for an integral perspective. More important than all this has been seeing the inner “I Am,” and realizing that we are not the objects of awareness, perceptual or conceptual; but, that we are pure consciousness, existence, bliss / spirit; and that transcendently, we are all one in consciousness. Peace, love, unity, respect! Ps. One of the best summaries of one of KW’s topics that I’ve heard!

[@asthrea_0718]

Politics, Philosophy, Psychology and Physics. Perfect! ❤

[@thefoupodcast-5588]

this is by far the most astonishing philosophy video I ever watched on KZbin, Your quadrants synthesis would make everyone understand human behaviour. very creative, objective, and innovative. well done !

[@Obiiiyk]

Seriously true, exceptionally articulate!

[@mariofialho]

Ken is a Genius he changed my life! A true master.

[@TheWalkingSeed]

I have been teaching the science behind Astrology for 30 years. The basic concept for 4000 years of this mindful awareness labeled Astrology, is that the space around us and the space within us gives us this sphere of influence that is displayed in the four quadrants of the one, the one surrounding itself in familiarity, the two, and the two surrounding itself with familiarity. This has been defined with what is called the cardinal cross that divides the sphere into these four quadrants. All that is, is defined by the characteristics we accept in a general way. These four seasons are the essence of our existence. In each quadrant there are three sections of expression, the birth of that sector, the focus/power and the release of power with adaptation. This is done in each quadrant, but through the four areas of the above. Twelve in to total, that gives us the well detailed characteristics that make up the human mind and experiences. We are at the edge of seeing these mental processes coming to a global acceptance. Thank you for your mindful talk. Dan

[@NGC-catseye]

That was a wonderful presentation. Great and easy to understand. It’s amazing that I instinctively knew all of theses four quadrants without even knowing I have been incorporating them my whole lives 😽

[@clifm]

Thanks!

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Thank you Cliff!

[@nolanbruner161]

The topic of human knowledge is a great topic in philosophy and this video explains many of the great perspectives. I found myself attracted to each topic and saw how only being focused on one quadrant leads to much hostility in society.

[@zootsoot2006]

Great video but he didn't mention what transcends and unites and all the quadrants, i.e. pure Spirit. Only when you get a taste of 'that' can you really start to balance out all of the separate quadrants.

[@cwfilli]

Very well done, mate. Such an excellent intro to the 4Q. Thanks for putting this together.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Thanks Christian!

[@GamingBlake2002]

This is the first of your videos that's been recommended to me. I took a look through your channel and I have to say it looks very interesting. I'll definitely be sticking around.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Ah awesome Blake!! Welcome aboard!!

[@tobiasluken1874]

Finally, I felt you were going into this direction. Happy to have you touch on Wilber

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Hahaha I've gone full Wilber Tobias 😂

[@n8works]

This is cracking me up. "Try to get your little tantrum under control" made me spit out my beer! Such an interesting and simple concept! I raise a glass to you compadre!

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Hahaha yeah I was wondering whether it was just me that was going to make laugh glad to hear I got you 😆

[@n8works]

@@TheLivingPhilosophy I enjoyed it! And I'm still thinking about your video. 😂 Cheers to your success.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

@@n8works Haha awesome Nate a chuckle and a bit of thought provocation you can't ask for much more than that!

[@darke216]

Everything is connected. All the main studies of the human experience from Psychology, Philosophy, Anthropology, and Sociology all serve it's purposes on their own but if you attempt to draw knowledge from only one source as your main perspective, your worldview becomes rigid, stale, and limited. It's always best to learn from them all because when combined not only do you learn from one particular area you may have lacked understanding in and it teaches you wisdom that allows you to fully become whole as an individual

[@mosesmutua1793]

You might not read this, but let me just say: This is the definition of objectivity, we are all the same yet so different. ❤ Don't point fingers -MN Love you man. First vid I've watched from your channel.

[@markwarrensprawson]

Life is so short and its conditions together with our own physical limitations does a whole lot to really boost the value of developing a single satisfactorily balanced thought or understanding of some principle or another. This is a truly beautiful tool and I'm incredibly grateful to have had its value demonstrated to me in such a concise and eloquent manner, as well as to its developer, Ken Wilber, of course. Thanks so much, Mr. Cussen. You rock.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Thanks Mark glad you got so much from it!

[@umbertopaoluccipierandrei1503]

Grazie.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

grazie mille Umberto!

[@alz1997]

This is a topic I didn't know that i needed to know about. Thank you for the in-depth explanation of this!

[@allenandrews2380]

Thanks for this. It's a helpful solution to the common problem of people " arguing past each other" Excellent brakedown in such a short amount of time.

[@trevorstark5845]

This is incredible. Aligns so much with Carl Jung. He invented the ideas of extroversion and introversion as well as the idea of the collective/Individual unconscious

[@psterud]

I love this. A very concise way of distilling not only how we think about things, but also how conflict so easily arises. I know it's probably a dumb thing to do, but I often find myself reading comments in KZbin videos, for instance (since we're here), and am nearly always - still - shocked at how quickly arguments occur. And they're more often than not started - and perpetuated - by people with polarized ideologies. And regardless of ideology, one can certainly see Wittgenstein's view at play: That the limits of one's language is the limit of one's world, and I'd say the reverse is clearly true as well.

[@henrikstromberg2572]

Thank you for sharing. After a few hours of thinking, here is how I conceptualized it. 1. Knowledge of internal experience. 2. Knowledge of external experience. 3. Knowledge of aggregated effects of internal experience. 4. Knowledge of aggregated effects of external experience.

[@rutherford5619]

The thumbnail is spot on, literally the four horse men of Germany.

[@stupidw33b52]

we're forgetting somebody 🧑🏻‍🎨🖼️

[@BewareOfTheKraut]

Freud was Austrian.

[@Yonkipog]

Nietzche literally solos karl marx's philosophies about life and human behavior, pretty dishonourable to german people but also shows a realistic side

[@Banana_Split_Cream_Buns]

An excellent video that delves into current topics. While I'm not much of a fan of Peterson, I hate these pretend intellectual snobs who call him a "pseudo-intellectual" without even attempting to justify their critique. A critique without an argument is only a smear.

[@thegreenpotato1]

Absolutely great video! I love your work. I just want to point out that when using fMRI there typically is no need for any type of dye, unless you're interested in tractography (studying the projections of neural axons between brain regions). Not needing dye is the main advantage of fMRI over PET as a neuroimaging technique. When looking at fluctuations of the BOLD signal, the way one would image the changes in the amygdala and prefrontal cortex you set as an example, all you need is a willing participant :)

[@WheelMarks]

This video was incredibly insightful, interesting and educational And you’ve convinced me to read Wilber Thank you!

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Deligted to hear it Michael thank you!!

[@bipolarbear-40N]

I could have woken up, watched this video, and gone back to sleep and it would have been a great day.

[@JoeFec]

This was the best one I've found in describing the four quadrants. Nicely done combo of clear explanation along with compelling video. Well done!

[@amirghandehari3003]

Thank you for your hard work creating this content. I like to see some longer videos or longer podcasts, cause I definitely like to hear more and go deeper in these subjects that you talk about. Good Luck

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Thanks a million Amir! There are podcasts on the horizon I am excited about getting into deeper and longer chats but I'm just trying to get in control of the creating videos bit for now because I'm still running into a lot of my personal hangups around creative process in this work but I'm hoping next year I can start dialoguing with the great minds out there

[@bejdavies]

I've recently become aware of Ken Wilber's work, which is a shame because I'm a few months away from publishing my own science of philosophy which is also grounded in a structure of four quadrants I call the 'dialectical matrix'. I've read a very large number of philosophical books and essays over the past decade, and I don't think I've ever heard an academic refer to Wilber's work. I wonder why this is. I don't know whether Wilber's work is significantly related to my work or not, but I'm confident that a four quadrant model is they key to resolving all problems in philosophy. The positioning of our quadrants is even similar. Wilber's 'internal individual' is what I call 'abjectivism' and is related to an introverted thinking temperament that seeks to look beyond the subject-object relation found in ordinary experience. 'External individual' would be 'objectivism' and is related to an extraverted thinking perspectve. 'Internal collective' would be 'subjectivism' and is related to an introverted feeling temperament. And 'external collective' is what I call 'superjectivism' and is related to an extraverted feeling perspective that seeks to unite the subject and object. Wilber seems to be more interested in personal experience, whereas my model maps all philosophical theories to these quadrants. The superjective perspective is related to self-consciousness and is inherently self-referential or paradoxical. It is this self-referential nature that provides the ground for the philosophical science, for it is necessarily true and contains the entire structure within itself, thus making all other quadrants relatively true as well.

[@jjsloyt]

"I don't think I've ever heard an academic refer to Wilber's work." I wondered the same and found some discussion on askphilosophy about this from a few years ago. Apparently his work isn't viewed very highly amongst academic philosophers. One example quoted below. "His main idea is that "everyone is right", or more carefully, no one is 100% wrong. So the correct methodology, he says, is to look at every participant in a debate as contributing something. It's a kind of restricted pluralism, where everyone is at least a little right, but not about everything. This is fine, as far as it goes, but the trick is that everyone already thinks this. He thinks its an earth-shattering intellectual breakthrough, but it's really just an unhelpful re-statement of the problem itself. We're all trying to patch together a set of beliefs from the options available to us, and looking to separate the wheat from the chaff. So banging on and on about it doesn't move us forward much." - u/autopoetic

[@bejdavies]

@@jjsloyt Sure, I agree that it's really an intuitive truth. I assume he feels it is radical because philosophical theories do implicate an assumption that they are right and their antitheses are wrong. If you can reveal that the same structure of perspectives emerges in all branches of philosophy, that this structure reflects the structure of phenomenal experience, and then prove that the structure is a real thing, then you do have an 'earth-shattering' breakthrough', for then you can identify theories with different aspects of reality.

[@abdelbella1487]

🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 🌐 Ken Wilber's four quadrants model provides a holistic framework for understanding human experience and knowledge. 01:40 🧠 The model consists of four quadrants: Internal Individual, External Individual, Internal Collective, and External Collective. 04:15 🗣️ Q3 is the realm of culture, language, and value systems, shaping our internal experiences in Q1 and Q2. 07:16 🏙️ Q4 represents the empirical aspects of collective experiences, including societal structures, technologies, and external systems. 12:08 🌀 The model helps understand conflicts between perspectives and disciplines by highlighting the importance of all four quadrants in shaping our understanding of reality. Made with HARPA AI

[@ravi_kumar14]

Wow! Just wow!! no fluff, no garbage, no bias, awesome. Keep up the good work.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Thanks a million!

[@wintaebear9838]

I'm so grateful to have come across this channel. I hope it grows more and more people can consume these beautifully presented content.

[@animant8811]

This was one of the best vids I've seen in a very long time

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Delighted you enjoyed it!

[@valentincontilde]

Thank you sir, it's been a while since I see quality content that wraps up the whole human experience in an entertaining format with good edition. Congratulations. Hi from Colombia

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Delighted you enjoyed it!

[@nabanitaghosh7268]

Wow, this video really shed some light on things for me! Thanks a bunch for sharing this. I'm definitely going to give it another watch to let it all sink in. It's amazing how certain content can really resonate and leave you wanting more. Can't wait to dive back in!

[@secularidiot9052]

Its cool to see that every corner has its own fields of science, showing the nuance behind scientific philosophy. The First Quadrant is all about your mind; examinations of emotion and feelings. This would be the domain of sciences such as psychology, which directly focuses on how the mind works. The Second Quadrant focuses on the material world, and how to come to conclusions about it. Unsurprisingly, this is the domain of the hard sciences (as you pointed out): biology (the study of living organisms and how they change), chemistry (the study of matter and its properties), and physics (the study of the behavior of matter and energy). The Third Quandrant deals with culture and interpersonal values. This is the realm of the majority of the soft sciences, such as anthropology (the study of humans), archaeology (the study of history), and sociology (the study of culture). The Fourth Quadrant deals with the objectively measurable aspects of a society, such as poverty rates, its size, the demographics, etc. This doesn't just apply to human societies, but ecosystems as well. This is the domain of political science, such as geography (the study of the land and its inhabitants), economics (the study of currency), and politics (the study of government). If I were to reduce it down to single words, I'd do it like this: Q1 = Mind Q2 = Body Q3 = Culture Q4 = Society

[@user-gc2wt3dx7q]

Clear summary thanks. First read Wilber quarter of a century ago. Read his back catalogue at that time. One Taste in 1999 changed my perspective of Wilber as a person but found Boomeritus thought provoking. Going to revisit that as result of your video.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

I haven't actually read either of those but Boomeritis has been on my list for a while because of the whole rise of the Green meme in the past few years

[@user-gc2wt3dx7q]

@@TheLivingPhilosophy definitely check them out, they are both insightful. One Taste to get an idea about how much/little(?) meditation/spiritual practice had affected Ken's life and Boomeritus on the spiral dynamics mean orange & green memes. I read around at that time on the conflicting perspectives over this eg Cowan and Todorovic. I heard Beck speak London around then too. Struggled to work out how to apply it and life kinda moved on. Anyway I will get back into this to see what I've potentially missed!

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

@@user-gc2wt3dx7q Awesome I think Boomeritis is high on the list now. I'm curious about One Taste but it's just not as relevant to me right now but maybe for the video I'll be making on Ken Wilber himself that one will be a good read. I'm planning on doing a spiral dynamics series (at least on blue - yellow which is what's most relevant at the moment) so that'll hopefully whet your appetite even more!

[@azizthani2]

Great job, deep and meaningful. You helped me to expand my understanding of Ken Wilber’s four quadrants. Thank you

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Delighted to be of some assistance Aziz!

[@davidcopson5800]

'Alone on a train, aimless in wander. An outdated map, crumpled in my pocket. But I didn't care where I was going. They're all different names for the same place.' Ben Gibbard.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Great song. Great album

[@davidcopson5800]

@@TheLivingPhilosophy So true.

[@nlclemens]

I just watched your continental vs analytical philosophy talk, and now this one. Very nicely explained-I understood some things I hadn’t previously. Thank you!!

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Ah that's great I'm delighted to hear it Nancy!

[@ruskinyruskiny1611]

Ineffective instincts (Evil) are often just habits which can be elmininated or turned into the opposite effective habit (Virtue) by patience (a good habit) and persistance (another good habit).

[@mathemitroyade]

Great job, thank you! It was totally a new fascinating perspective to me. I guess I need some time in order to digest it. :0)

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

My pleasure! Thanks for watching!

[@khalidhakimi93]

what is most often referred to as a genius is someone who expresses himself from his experiences of the world or an understanding of things from his authentic self and so therefore what the normal individual is is that basically he is like everybody else and not something unique and thinks like everybody else and merely accepts what he has read in the books without questioning them and so therefore one must be careful of reading too much for one might become too dense like a hot lava turned dry. they key is to always use your own intellect with what you read

[@TheBigFella]

Probably the best video I’ve watched this year

[@VS-2002]

A truly balanced perspective presented in this video regarding multiple schools of thought that are often shown to be strongly opposed to one another. Well done!

[@tmcg5471]

Thanks for taking the time to share this model of Wilber in such a clear way. It has helped me to make sense of what is, most of the time, a confusing field of seemingly competing views and perspectives.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Glad it was helpful!

[@Joshhiejay]

Yep there is is, the most unbiased video I've ever seen on KZbin. Great video!

[@leticiapereira3186]

what is the analogy to humans being more like bacteria vs cancer ? that sounds super interesting I've never heard it in that way

[@rick8246]

i just watched the video and i just wanted to say this is changing my life. im definetly going to read both books but i already know and feel the impact, it is exactly what my intuition was thriving to all the time. feeling blessed rn☝️🙏💯🤣 might come back in a few months to actually look at the difference, nah shit im definetly coming back i know i wont forget this

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Delighted to hear it rick that brings me a lot of joy

[@HarshSingh-qr5lm]

Wow. That was an amazing video. I had known something like this for a long time. I just didn't knew there was a model to explain such complexity.

[@sean369]

What a great video. It really was a very accessible introduction to this work and the analogies were fantastic to help explain the concepts. I especially liked the river and hunger examples. I’ll be mulling this over for a while. SUBSCRIBED! Thanks 😀

[@jaylenoschin8189]

Excellent explanation, thank you, you are a great teacher. This is an example of the value that the internet and social media can bring to one’s life...

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Wow Jay thank you so much that means a lot!

[@gabrielsimpson9919]

Actually ordered theory of everything before realizing you uploaded this. Great timing :)

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Ah amazing! Perfect timing then!

[@satnamo]

Language speaks: The limits of my language means the limits of my world because the world is my ideas and their representations since what I believe about life and the universe becomes true for me for god is the dreamer.

[@MrBaconman240]

Damn

[@jeffkitson9565]

Great stuff, I am really enjoying your content, I just found you and subbed. I like how you incorporate Jordan Peterson's ideas. I think it's s shame people politicize him, and miss the deeper meaning in the man's work, and what he is about. I find him a very deep thinker indeed, and a brave man to stand up for what he believes in, especially considering the age we live in, where everyone seems to be yelling their own judgements into the digital void, not listening to anything other than themselves or their own clique. Can I ask, are you from academia? Do you work within the academy at all? Or are you a self-taught philosopher?

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

I'm glad you enjoy it Jeff. I may not agree with his political positions at all these days but I still find an immense amount of value in his maps of meaning work. In answer to your question I am not an academic. I did my undergrad in philosophy but more or less self-taught I would say. University just gave me the confidence to realise that what I was already doing and my style of doing things is something I'm happy with and got rid of my impostor syndrome around that as if the professionals were doing something special. For that alone I guess it was a gift though I did have some wonderfully insightful modules in the course of that degree to be fair. But no never worked in academia

[@jeffkitson9565]

@@TheLivingPhilosophy I've never attempted his maps of meaning work, I hear it is a very interesting, if not tough, book to get through. A lot of symbolism and depth to his ideas. I've always thought that it is very interesting that JP, who could be described as a modern day 'pop' philosopher or public intellectual, comes from the school of psychology, and so many people, for the life of them, can't understand a word the man is saying. I think it's a left/right brain thing (Iain Mcgilchrist, "the matter with things," 2021). People that are more right brain can hear profound truths in his ideas, whereas people that are more left brain, and more technical, hear a word salad of contradictory nonsense. Interesting how you only did an undergraduate, probably saved yourself there! The academy at the moment seems to be suffering from administrative bloat; too many money people and too many so-called "professionals" that seem to have sold out, trying to push their own ideas and theories rather than entering the various debates with an open sense of enquiry. Especially in the UK, where I am from. I think basically, university is being corrupted by market forces, decreasing the quality of study all around. There seems to be a massive financial bubble in British higher education, too much cheap easy money floating around, and student debts that will never be repaid. When you add into this the fact that Chinese money is drying up, I think the whole sector could see a massive contraction soon. The CCP and its international educational policies have been propping up the English education sector for the past few decades (and probably the USA's), and when you think about that, it really is a crazy clash of ideologies, economic forces and politics. The modern world is a weird place.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

@@jeffkitson9565 ooh I think you've probably hit the nail on the head with the hemisphere thing that makes a lot of sense! I don't think it explains everything I think big right brainers who are much more left will still dismiss Maps of Meaning as tosh (though I wonder if they would have before 2016? probably the contamination of the Peterson name through his political work). I've read master and his emissary. Have you read the matter with things? I'm a bit daunted by the whole thing and I wasn't 100% onboard with the thesis of Master so I'm not sure whether it's just a longer version of the same. Also interesting what you're saying about the academy. I actually studied up in Aberdeen and was studying at the time that they raised the roof on fees so they went from 1800 to 9k overnight per year (which I of course being an EU citizen didn't have to pay since ireland didn't have fees so thank the lord for that!). I could very much see the market dynamics shaping the institution already. What really disillusioned me was the article writing treadmill academics seemed to be shoved on (of course I've ended up on a consistent posting schedule here as well driven by market dynamics so what do I know!!). But what I had not heard was about the Chinese money in the UK education system. That is very interesting and I'm curious to see how that one plays out

[@jeffkitson9565]

@@TheLivingPhilosophy I have not read the Matter with Things, but I’ve watched enough of Iain online that I think I understand what the premise is. Funnily enough, I was put off reading dense academic work as I once tried to read some of the German philosophers; ‘the word as will and representation’ by Schopenhauer and ‘being and time’ by Heidegger, and they were almost unreadable. I’m not sure if it was the translation, but they were both just hundreds of pages of dense academic drivel (to me at least). The thing that really irritated me, was I am sure there are some good ideas in those works, but you could spend literally weeks trying to get through those texts, and likely not fully understand what they are about, or you could just watch a well-made 10-minute video essay that sums up the main points in a way that is easily comprehendible. I suppose that is my problem with the academy in some ways, people purposely try to make things more complex and harder to understand than they need to be. Good philosophy in my mind should be easy to comprehend. I think this is why I like the ancient Greek philosophers; a lot of their ideas weren’t overly objective and complex, but were more about how to live well. I always liked epicureanism, it seemed to be like an ancient Greek version of the hippie movement. The idea not to get too engaged in politics and worldly success, but find a good group of people, build a safe community, and pursue pleasure and mastery of whatever you are passionate about, without being too indulgent. Seemed to me to be a great way to live! Yea the article writing treadmill, and also the module textbook writing treadmill, is almost a perfect example of how money seems to be corrupting higher education. Professors that update their textbooks every couple of years, then demand their student buy them, whilst charging £40/£50 for each new edition. I have heard Iain’s work is more like poetry, so perhaps I will attempt them one day. How come you were not on board with his thesis in Master and his Emissary? I know some people think his work is a bit reductive, I had heard that the left/right brain split had been debunked, but from what I understand, Iain’s work is a very solid argument that there really is truth in it.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Haha yeah philosophy is definitely not the easiest subject to read but I think for the most part it couldn't have been written much simpler. Or not entirely anyway. I feel like philosophers are very often pioneers chasing things beyond the edge of the known world - they are trying to annex a new area of a chaos. In that sense I think they are coming up with new languages and reporting back on what they see. And so it is those who follow the pioneers who tame this land and make it more ordered and eventually the culture can inhabit that space as a whole (a process I would say happened with the early modern thinkers into the enlightenment era and into the current date). So I tend to forgive them for the most part even if it often frustrates me to hell (and without a doubt there are some in there who intentionally obfuscate; sometimes (as is often the case with France as Foucault has discussed) this is actually a market dynamic where the reading public selects for those thinkers who are harder to read for some reason - simplicity isn't trusted). As for McGilchrist the left/right brain stuff was brilliant. You are right to say it was debunked but that was the simplified version. This is why McGil took 20 years to write Master and His Emissary to bring together all the science to create a robust model of the hemispheres. The part that I'm hesitant about is his argument that postmodernism is a runaway left hemisphere dynamic. I'm not so sure. I think there are reasons to say that it is a return to right hemispheric centredness. But that being said I'm still tentative with this and so I wouldn't be dying on that hill or anything. Just a suspicion.

[@maximelemaire8520]

Adam Smith wouldnt be Q4 instead of Q3 ? He studied the structural way the economy works, doesn't seem that internal to me

[@juliafreeland-revolveyou1185]

Really amazing job breaking these quadrants down and giving examples in a very objective / fair way. Well done!

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Glad you enjoyed it Julia thanks a million!

[@JCAdams98]

The simplified version: Q1 Spiritual Q2 Scientific Q3 Cultural Q4 Political

[@philipslimak5675]

I've comfortably resided in the Q1 zone back in 2020 when I came to believe that everything can be withdrawn from self-analysis as people are able to experience the same or similar things as you. If it wasn't like that, no art and religion would have ever existed. Paradoxically I see here a metaphysical dialectic as Q1 by postulating something universal from individual experience leans to finding the similar experience in the Other while itself utilizing precisely uniqueness of own experience. We yearn to find ourselves in the Other but only through both ourselves and the Other being unique, as only something unique can be speculated as universal or suspected to universality, as we can draw attention only to something significant and specific.

[@saared6705]

I feel like its another classification system aimed to unifie, but in the end I just feel it divide knowledges into cold square shapes. Classifying is always useful, but does it has a realistic platonic ambition to resume experiences ? Logically, semantically it seems valid to separate like that (outside vs inside, individual vs collective), but it looks clumsy to dive into perspectives of each field between others. It feels uncomplete and too simple. Classifications and concepts are always simplifications, and I dont attack the division tool in itself. But the ambition of viewing and working with all knowledges and experiences in this simple shape looks limited and inconsistent

[@DREWINSTECKER]

hands down, one of the best videos i've ever watched! Thankyou!

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Wow high praise thank you!

[@tompiro6682]

This is extremely well done. You should be proud of this type of content 👏

[@axelbauron155]

I'm an atheist and a buddhist. Moreover, I'm a materialist: I don't believe in soul, reincarnation, gods, angels, ghosts... until you can show it to me. And there is absolutely no contradiction in this. I'd invite everyone to try it. Cheers!

[@RoderickVI]

I beg to differ, gods are very easily demonstrable through the world around us, what is likely the case is you come from a christian or christianized background so your understanding of the gods is inherently corrupted. As a European gentile allow me to explain a few concepts. 1. The relationship between the spiritual and the material. According to abrahamic believe, the material and spiritual are separate, and to achieve spiritual uplifting one ought to abandon the material. Additionally, the material is seen as created and ruled by the spiritual, but there not being any influence from the material into the spiritual. Us European gentiles see things differently. The material and spiritual are both one and the same, and different yet interconnected. Think of the rules of the universe, such as the laws of physic, the rules of nature, or the eternal balancing of ecosystems. These things are intangible and often, not attributable to material things. Many rules of nature are the result of material things that precede them, yes, but the material things themselves dont preset the rules, they just give way to them. The material is the place where rules come to fruition, and the rules govern all the material. Material circumstances can be changed, but the rules of the universe cannot, they are eternal and immutable, they only present themselves or not depending on the factors that give way to them. You cant have the material without the spiritual rules that bind the material together, nor can you have the spiritual without the material which gives way to it. Both are inextricably linked, interdependent and coexistant. However there is a clear hierarchy, the spiritual leads the material and can change it, whereas the material cannot change the spiritual, however it can give it place to manifest itself.

[@RoderickVI]

2. The concept of the gods. As I have just described the spiritual as a set of rules, immutable in nature, and ever affecting the material according to circumstance, the same thing applies to gods. We don't believe in personal gods, in fact we dont believe in any gods, we observe the gods present in nature. Gods are precisely the culmination of these rules: Jupiter is divine order, from Ius Pater, meaning the father of law. He is represented as king of the sky because he is all encompassing, law is ever present, you cannot hide from it and it always observes you. Mars is preservation, he both defends the tribe and provides for it, it's the communal sense of altruistic conservation every species has, all throughout nature. Prometheus is (literally) forethought and epimetheus (literally) afterthought. Humans stem from prometheus because our distinctive feature is, through structured language, being able to forsee the future (roughly speaking), planning and adapting to it. Whereas most other animals are derived from epimetheus because instinct is driven by past experiences. Now, are we absent in instinct? No of course not, and in a sense our very own forethought is instinctual, but thats why Epimetheus and Prometheus are brothers, they come from the same origin. Gods are simply that, the rules by which we must abide, they are real, they are evident, however people feel detracted from acknowledging their existence because of how abrahamism has portrayed their god.

[@RoderickVI]

3. Destiny. If there is one supreme principle, one that both men and gods alike must follow, it is destiny. Destiny is nothing more than cause and effect. Our every action is predisposed by both 1. our past, 2. ourselves, 3. the gods (the rules of the universe), 4. our environment. And how these interact with one another. None of your decisions are truly "free willed". Whether you choose to do something or not that is influenced by 1. your physiological needs, 2. your memories (which you cannot change), 3. your genetics (which you cannot change), 4. your culture, 5. the decisions available at your disposal (which you dont choose), 6. the rules of the world and how they affect the interaction of all prior 5 things. Your actions are the result of other things, you don't decide but abide by them. This is destiny, it is forged by our past and as such our present actions are determined. Whatever doubt or remnant belief in free will which still stands is just because of our ignorance to the things that provoked our actions, not the lack of said provocations. And in retrospect all decisions seem like the logical conclusion to the things that came before. Destiny is this cause-effect relationship. It cannot be escaped, it cannot be avoided, even by the gods. For the gods who set the rules by which we play the game of life, cannot set rules for interactions that dont exist, but only those that do. And for interactions to occur they must be the result of destiny, that is to say, our pasts.

[@dylanbuckle114]

Absolutely brilliant video. Really rich and so much to absorb. I’ve had to watch it twice and I’m bound to come back to it.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Awesome Dylan delighted you enjoyed it!

[@brpragyanchaitanya9442]

Vedantic interpretation of quadrants: Individual - व्यष्टि Collective - समष्टि Internal - अहम् External - इदम् Q1 - व्यष्टि अहम् (अध्यात्म) thoughts Q2 - व्यष्टि इदम् ( अधिभूत1) brain/body Q3 - समष्टि अहम् (अधिदैव) culture Q4 - समष्टि इदम् (अधिभूत2) technology

[@shivachinnasamy9332]

Ken Wilber can be a good starting point but when one wants to get to truly integral synthesis beyond mere intellectual speculation, one can go to Sri Aurobindo's works starting with the Life Divine and the Human Cycle.

[@OneRandomLeo]

I think a good analogy for thr last two is archeology. We can dig up tools, architecture, art, bones etc (Q4), but we can only guess what their culture (Q3) was like.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Goddamn that's actually a far better analogy than the foreign country. It really emphasises the fact that this is a different land and it can't speak but you can touch the tangible collective elements of it. I love it!

[@OneRandomLeo]

@@TheLivingPhilosophy wow thanks for your reply, it made my day! 🥰

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

@@OneRandomLeo Haha delighted to hear it!

[@piehound]

Very interesting matrix. I had no idea of its existence. As a former amateur mathematician i know a little about matrices. It seems very useful to help untangle the many points of view available to internet users. Thanks.

[@manhbeo128]

In the past few months, I have learnt more than all my entire. I learned economics, philosophy, mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, history, literature,... and it's always been on the back of my mind that all these are just different approaches to understanding life. And I have never been able to make out as clearly about the interlinkage. I'm particularly interested in and think the learnings that define my thinking are Buddhism (Q1), neuroscience and physics (Q2), microeconomics (Q3) and macroeconomics (Q4)... which I think all talked about cycles and frequency? Cycle of life and death, frequency of waves, circadian and ultradian cycles and economic cycle. Unless I learn something that contradicts the cycles, I am believing any school of thoughts that tries to explain life will eventually go to cycles.

[@manhbeo128]

All will lead to the most fundamental of all: frequency, which is temporary (Buddhism's impermanence; which aligns with all science). Therefore, there are nothing that are different from others (Buddhism's no-self).

[@JimFarrand]

Great video! Many thanks for your work. I think that this is probably a useful model of knowledge, but it strikes me that it's also very human-centred, and it feels like there is a danger here that some people confuse the map with the territory - the universe doesn't really contain either a dichotomy or even a spectrum between individual and collective, or between internal and external. (Or at least, not on the level implied by this model.) And so we need to be careful not to promote tools like this to the status where we believe they represent something fundamental about reality. We're using here one set of human created concepts to classify and organise others. We've not stumbled across some inherent classification of what there actually is.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Good point Jim and that's on me I'm afraid. In Wilber's work the model starts with atoms and with the internal experience of bacteria and passes through the human as part of a greater evolution but for the purposes of the channel I thought I'd hone in on the human side of it. That beings said you are very right that the map should not be confused with the territory and we must never forget that a map is always just that. If it makes the territory more accessible then that's good news but it is never a substitute

[@PhilosophyToons]

Interesting model, does Wilber suggest that the way to resolve inter-quadrant disagreements is to see the world through the lens of this model? Do you think that would work? Also which quadrant would the model itself fit into?

[@user-sl6gn1ss8p]

I like that last question. I'd guess fourth looking into third?

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Yeah I think his idea is to look at it from all quadrants. In Wilber's conception of it they are all interconnected so the whole thing is made up of a "holon" (a whole that is also a part like an atom is whole but is part of a molecule so it's both a whole and a part at once) viewable from the perspective of all four quadrants at once. So his thing would be that any disagreements are stemming from seeing things partially and if you viewed the fullness of the thing in question the disagreement would dissolve. That would be my guess anyway. Same thing goes for the quadrant of the model itself it's something operating on all four levels (at least I bet that would be Wilber's answer and I guess it's hard to argue though my penchant for Q3 makes me wanna call it a Q3 arrangement)

[@_VISION.]

The fact that Freud is in that spot and not Jung is comedy

[@sirjazzfeet5564]

Take any mess, divide it symmetrically, and order arises. Through the repetition and regularity of resonant ratios. It's a nice tool, but as you say, another form of reduction. Not a tetrad or mobius strip which exists simultaneously.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

Yeah for me it's useful as a model. For Wilber it would be something closer to a map of reality but I think that anything that helps us create greater and greater order and digest more and more of our experience. As they say "all models are wrong but some are useful"

[@sirjazzfeet5564]

@@TheLivingPhilosophy a complementary perceptual model you may find interesting is Marshall McLuhan's technological tetrad. It's a dynamic map or model, where order turns into chaos, and more into less, individuals into crowds, and vice versa. Or at high speeds, the gap between individual and collective eroded, creating the tribe. Aristotle's four causes reworked to function all at once; all influencing each other.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

@@sirjazzfeet5564 oh that's interesting that could be worth a look I remember Baudrillard interacting with him quite a bit in Simulacra and Simulation and I do love a new model! And it also sounds very relevant. Any idea what the best place to read about it would be?

[@sirjazzfeet5564]

​@@TheLivingPhilosophy yes, there is a book called 'McLuhan and Baudrillard, Masters of Implosion' - explosion being the individual in conquest of outer space. Implosion relating to the paradox of putting our nervous system outside us (in the form of electrical networks) for the inner feelings of the 'inner trip' (an outburst of diversity based on greater emotional complexity). The main book being 'Understanding Media' the singular of 'media' being 'medium' or technology, or the environment produced by humans and their technology; media ecology, and the humans reproduced in return. The aphorism 'The medium is the message' relates to phenomenological study of the media; where one is figure and the other is ground. Figure poking through ground, or ground poking through figure, works both ways. Similar to Heidegger. Just as Baudrillard collapses reality and representation, when listening to McLuhan, you may feel a kind of implosion yourself lol. 'Suppression of the visual sense back into relation to the other senses'. McLuhan calls this, simply the effect the electric age; he often writes like the telegraph; in highly compressed format, with no urge to finish sentences, or even explain himself 'I don't explain, I explore'. In poetic terms, it's like Keats negative capability or lack of closure. So after reading 'Understanding Media' you may come away thinking 'Okay, now I understand much less', as he does often induce the ultimate mystery of reality with his reports on the illusion of rationality and logic; single causes, static truths, simple finite answers, the separate individual. He does this by simulating non-literate culture, which he considers a form of mimesis, or a putting on of his audience as a mirror. But UM is also an inquiry into metaphysical contradictions and their solutions. Similar to how Hericlitus was the patron saint of dialetical flux, Wired Magazine anointed McLuhan as the patron saint of technology and change. Although, after the cybernetic communism of the 1960s and 70s, McLuhanism was co-opted by the 1980s, before network culture and the internet went mainstream in a neoliberal fashion. But, things eventually reverse "Change itself becomes the only constant" - McLuhan Fellow Canadian Harold Innis was the first person since the beginning of literacy to study the effects of technology. He was the only human being to study the effects of literacy on people who were literate, or the effects of anything on anybody. Aristotle and Plato never studied the effects of anything on anybody. Not the effects after impact, but the effects preceding impact, effects before the cause or the discovery. 'Taking Up McLuhan's Cause: Perspectives on Media and Formal Causality' - 2017 I believe Ralph Waldo Emerson was the first to refer to technology as extensions of ourselves. “The human body is the magazine of inventions, the patent office, where are the models from which every hint is taken. All the tools and engines on earth are only extensions of its limbs and senses." In other words, innovation is just rediscovering the routes of communication that already exist. After we create hardware and software models, we realize we don't really need them, we can do it anyway. For McLuhan, communication is change, it's transformation, and we change each other all the time through dialogue. A lot of people think communication is transportation, as described in Claude Shannon's information theory; getting the signal as clear as possible from A to B. But to communicate clearly requires us to grasp the transformative power of medium to change the message and our audience. The 'Nerdwriter' on KZbin did a video on this.

[@TheLivingPhilosophy]

@@sirjazzfeet5564 Amazing thanks for taking the time to map all that out I really appreciate it and I guess I shall be reading Understanding Media to get a deeper look into it