Collingwood's Idea of History & Speculum Mentis

Re: Collingwood's Idea of History, Speculum Mentis & Gurdjieff's Primitive Cosmology

p 78-80 said:
Information may be the body of knowledge, but questioning is the soul.

I also liked the way Collingwood expressed "knowledge utilization":

pg 68 said:
'How much, as one grows older, one finds in so-and-so,' people say, 'that one never saw before!' Yes; and how much one has not even yet seen! For one never sees anything in anybody's work but what one brings to it, and it is as true of art as of nature that

we receive but what we give,
And in our life alone doth Nature live;
Ours is her wedding-garment, ours her shroud.

p 90 said:
To speak of the growth of knowledge is to imply that new thoughts, new facts, are perpetually coming to consciousness.

Laura said:
(L) Well, I have to say that for a long time, the idea that nothing we did would make any difference in the processes going on here on the planet politically and socially and earth-change wise: intellectually, I've understood that. But I guess it's only been in the last six months to a year that I've come to viscerally understand that we do what we do simply because it's the right thing to do. I don't see any hope for changing the juggernaut that's marching across the planet.

A: What's important is what comes after.

Q: (L) So in other words, what we're doing is carrying a seed through massive changes?

(Galatea) We're like Frodo trekking through Mordor to chuck the ring into the fiery pit of Mount Doom.

A: Close enough!

Or like carrying a seed for the next level?

p 164 said:
It is the very essence of a dialectical development that each phase in it should contain the next implicitly, and it is this implicit presence of elements which are, as it were, submerged in the immediacy of a particular phase, that necessitates the collapse of that phase. Every phase of experience is implicit in its predecessor, ...

I'm making my way through Collingwood's explanations on materialism and its fundamental errors in Speculum Mentis. As I understand it, this is where Gurdjieff was at when he developed his cosmology. It also seems to explain the disenchantment with "materialistic science" with its various "classificatory specializations" which then lead me to the Cassiopaea website on 2003. The book is a treasure of knowledge and experience, and it explains so much "explicitly".

We are living in very interesting times!
 
Re: Collingwood's Idea of History, Speculum Mentis & Gurdjieff's Primitive Cosmology

From the thread "Stoicism and Paul: Making a Cosmology-Anthropology-Ethics for Today"

Approaching Infinity said:
The means to do so are ends in themselves: mutual love (“S->S”) and self-abasement (“X->I”). The result of leaving behind “I” is “S” - the formation of a Christ community where Paul’s maxim is put into practice.

Nice complementary explanation from Collingwood in Speculum Mentis:

p 169-171 said:
When the mind becomes conscious of itself as thought it simultaneously becomes conscious of itself as action. Thought and action, truth and freedom ('ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free') are inseparable, and are in fact correlative aspects of an indivisible reality. Hence they became simultaneously explicit in the mind's process of self-discovery...

The distinction between intellect and will is an ideal distinction, as is that of the universal and the particular. But science, which discovers both these distinctions, treats them both in the same way, by converting them erroneously into concrete distinctions, treating as separate terms which are only distinguishable. Terms such as inside and outside, back and front, beginning and end, are distinguishable and indeed distinct, but not separate ; the specific error of science would be exemplified in regard to these terms if we tried to conceive an inside that had no outside, and so on. The separation of knowledge from conduct is thus a result of scientific abstraction...

The will, like any other concept, is by science abstractly conceived. It is a self-identical principle to which its own
varying manifestations are indifferent. The characteristic question of the scientific mind is 'What is there in or behind
all these varying instances which is one and invariable?' Now this question, applied to human action, can have only
one result. Action as such is purposive, and anything purposed is an end. Hence to be means to an end is the
invariable characteristic of all action. If we approached ethics from a concrete point of view we should see that every action stood in a unique relation to a unique end, and that the separation of means and end was a mere artifice of thought: that in any given instance the means and the end were inextricably bound up together.
But such artificial separations are the essence of scientific method. That method, therefore, applied to the study of conduct, necessarily gives the result that all actions, no matter what, aim at something other than themselves, which may be called their end or good. Action is not the good, it is means to the good ; and hence action as such is not good but useful.

The ethics of the scientific consciousness is always utilitarian, using that word in its broadest sense. This is not
because such utilitarianism is a true account of action, for it is true only in the very restricted sense in which its twin
brother materialism is true ; it is because, just as materialism abstracts from concrete objects their objectivity and calls this abstraction matter, so utilitarianism abstracts from concrete actions their purposiveness and calls it utility.
 
Re: Collingwood's Idea of History, Speculum Mentis & Gurdjieff's Primitive Cosmology

Altair said:
This C's quote comes to mind:

Quote

All there is is lessons. This is one infinite school. There is no other reason for anything to exist. Even inanimate matter learns it is all an "Illusion." Each individual possesses all of creation within their minds. Now, contemplate for a moment. Each soul is all powerful and can create or destroy all existence if know how. You and us and all others are interconnected by our mutual possession of all there is. You may create alternative universes if you wish and dwell within. You are all a duplicate of the universe within which you dwell. Your mind represents all that exists. It is "fun" to see how much you can access.

Q: (L) It's fun for who to see how much we can access?

A: All. Challenges are fun. Where do you think the limit of your mind is?

Q: (L) Where?

A: We asked you.

Q: (L) Well, I guess there is no limit.

A: If there is no limit, then what is the difference between your own mind and everything else?

Q: (L) Well, I guess there is no difference if all is ultimately one.

A: Right. And when two things each have absolutely no limits, they are precisely the same thing.

I was thinking about this quote as well, Altair, a couple of days ago, although I had forgotten the details. So, thanks for posting it!

I am almost halfway through The idea and I think this journey is fascinating and very exciting. Thank you all!! :flowers:
 
Re: Collingwood's Idea of History, Speculum Mentis & Gurdjieff's Primitive Cosmology

Still reading Speculum Mentis; it's really a powerful book and very demanding. I found it useful not to rush through, and when I didn't really understand a paragraph or a line of thought, to go back and get to the bottom of it. There are so many gems and powerful ideas, and he leaves out a lot of fluff, which makes the book very dense and complex (he says so himself in the introduction). Sometimes a few more examples would have been helpful, but on the other hand, really understanding what he's saying and finding the gems is a great mental workout and part of the "fun" :)

Among so many things that stood out for me was his description of science and the development of scientific thought. It's as if someone finally, finally explains how this crazy world of thought came into being and why; what lies behind the various philosophical battles; and why it's all so confused. It also makes me a bit less angry and frustrated with the materialist dogma, which is so contradictory and illogical and "religious" in its zeal. But it becomes clear why this is so if we know that these ideas are implicit in scientific thought - and strangely enough, originated from the seemingly anti-empiricist idea that we can know the truth by mere thought, because the very concept of materialism is an abstract construct of the mind that in science is confused with the real world. In a sense, it's an unconscious Platonism that unconsciously works in the realm of what it thinks is pure thought, while consciously believing that everything is just "material" and nothing can exist otherwise.

Here is an excerpt, and it's a good example of the density of the material, but also its many insights:

Speculum Mentis said:
Mathematics, mechanism, and materialism are the three marks of all science, a triad of which none can be separated from the others, since in fact they all follow from the original act by which the scientific consciousness comes into being, namely, the assertion of the abstract concept. They are all, it may be said, products of the classificatory frame of mind, corollaries from the fact that in this frame of mind the universal and the particular are arbitrarily separated and the universal asserted in its barren and rigid self-identity. It is this barrenness and this rigidity which confer their character upon the doctrines of scientific materialism.

Hence it is idle to imagine that materialism is justified in some sciences and not in others. It is idle to protest that science ought to surrender its materialistic prejudices when it finds itself face to face with a non-material object such as the soul. No object is material, in the metaphysical sense of the word, except so far as scientific thinking conceives it so; for materiality means abstractness, subjection to the formulae of mechanical determination and mathematical calculation, and these formulae are never imposed upon any object whatever except by an arbitrary act which falsifies the object’s nature.

This only appears paradoxical when we fail to see the gulf which separates the commonsense materiality of a table, its sensible qualities, from its metaphysical materiality, the abstract conceptual substrate of those qualities. It is this substrate whose transcendent or abstract existence is asserted by materialism. Hence we cannot distinguish objects like tables which are really ‘material’ from objects in whose presence science must unlearn its materialistic habits of thought. Materialism is no more the truth in physics than in psychology, and no less. It is the truth about any object, just in so far as this object is by abstraction reducible to terms of pure mathematics; and no object is so reducible except by consciously or unconsciously shutting our eyes to everything which differentiates it from anything else. This conscious or unconscious act of abstraction is the very being of the scientific consciousness; and it is therefore no matter for pained surprise when science shows a bias towards determinism, behaviourism, and materialism generally.

What makes it so fascinating I think is that Collingwood doesn't just describe how this or that came into being historically; it's an attempt to describe the very fabric of reality, the structure behind thought, meta-laws that guide the collective thought of humanity that are otherwise invisible. This also makes it a demanding read - what he talks about takes place one level higher than ordinary philosophy, I think. It's not just shuffling around abstract fancies in one's head, it goes beyond that, he really pierces the illusion (or at least attempts to do so) that is our ordinary mental life. Don't know, I can't describe it better.
 
Re: Collingwood's Idea of History, Speculum Mentis & Gurdjieff's Primitive Cosmology

After rereading The Idea of History, I'm a little past one third into Speculum Mentis. It seems a bit more challenging to read than even The Idea of History. I'll continue working through Mentis, rereading sentences and paragraphs as needed to make sure I'm following Collingwood's thoughts precisely. It's a really interesting experience, as others have pointed out, as well. Thanks for initiating this latest project.
 
Re: Collingwood's Idea of History, Speculum Mentis & Gurdjieff's Primitive Cosmology

I liked Collingwood enough that I started another of his books; 'An Essay On Metaphysics' which is quite interesting already. Early on the C's admonished us to dispense with assumptions. Collingwood writes: "From Aristotle's metaphysical programme, as I sketched it in the first chapter, I have extracted two propositions about the nature of metaphysics: that it is the science of pure being, and that it studies presuppositions. I have shown that there cannot be a science, nor even a quasi-science or pseudo- science, of pure being. Perhaps the other formula will prove more rewarding." He draws a distinction between assumptions as being conscious "let us assume x represents... and presuppositions as being below the level of conscious awareness?

Anyway, not part of the curriculum. Don't want to distract. I'll be finished with 'Anatomy' soon.
 
Re: Collingwood's Idea of History, Speculum Mentis & Gurdjieff's Primitive Cosmology

I was thinking about the phrase "thinking with a hammer" and philosophy and engineering, and I got the image of someone using a hammer to drive nails into boards to create a structure... This is what engineers do, they must create mental structures which are capable of solving the problems they are faced with, especially at the beginning of their career where they must create a new one for almost every problem. And whenever I have had personal breakthroughs it has usually been from creatively discovering a way or method of thinking which was able to process the issue or provide new pathways for thought to take.

This is just what has come out of the general feeling I have gotten while working through TIOH.
 
Re: Collingwood's Idea of History, Speculum Mentis & Gurdjieff's Primitive Cosmology

luc said:
What makes it so fascinating I think is that Collingwood doesn't just describe how this or that came into being historically; it's an attempt to describe the very fabric of reality, the structure behind thought, meta-laws that guide the collective thought of humanity that are otherwise invisible. This also makes it a demanding read - what he talks about takes place one level higher than ordinary philosophy, I think. It's not just shuffling around abstract fancies in one's head, it goes beyond that, he really pierces the illusion (or at least attempts to do so) that is our ordinary mental life. Don't know, I can't describe it better.

I agree. That is the same impression I got and why I realized that this guy's work is very important. Those who are reading it will definitely benefit I think. And I think it is also important for some of you who are able to condense some of it down for those who have more difficulty.

The main thing I noticed about these books is that they require SUSTAINED attention. And those of you who read "Anatomy of Violence" will immediately understand how beneficial this is. And if a person has been paying attention to the Cs over the years, they will understand that this is one of the drums they beat repeatedly: AWARENESS.

And of course, all these brain activities take us back to the issue of being good receivers, or receivership capability, which is, apparently, the main thing about going through significant changes in a positive way. It's probably useful to read the 11 October 2014 session for a rundown on that factor: https://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,36259.msg527536.html#msg527536 particularly, this section of the session:

Laura said:
Session Date: October 11th 2014

(L) ... I printed out some session extracts from a few years back because I started thinking about them in relation to trying to find some answers to certain questions that I'm going to get to in a minute. The first one is from September 23rd, 2000. I was asking about DNA and about INTRONS and so forth:

---
Q: ... It is now known that there are pieces of DNA within a gene that are not translated into protein. These intervening sequences, or INTRONS, are somewhat of a mystery, but appear to be a very common phenomenon." Now, is this thing they are talking about, these INTRONS, are these the core that you were talking about?

A: In part.

Q: What about this ALU repeat with over 300,000 copies of the same base pair sequence. What is it?

A: Tribal unit.

Q: What is a tribal unit?

A: Sectionalized zone of significant marker compounds.

Q: What does this code for?

A: Physiological/spiritual union profile.

Q: Could you define "tribal" for me?

A: You define.
---

(L) Well, I think that obviously "tribal" means physiological spiritual union profile, and that that may have something to do with what we were talking about at a previous session when we asked about Caesar's soul group. Physiological spiritual union profile would be what defines what tribe you belong to, but it's a spiritual tribe and not necessarily specifically physical. You can grow into it according to some criteria... “graduate” was the term used. Am I correct here about a tribal group being like a soul group? Is that an accurate way of putting it?

A: Very close.

Q: (L) Is there anything that can get me closer?

A: In some cases there is also a supersensory component.

Q: (L) What is a supersensory component?

A: Externally driven mutation.

Q: (L) Externally driven by what?

A: Most often by the occupying soul itself.

Q: (L) So are you saying that if a soul selects a body or gets a close frequency match to a body that it wants to use, that it can also modify that body for its own purposes if it needs to and if the DNA match isn't quite to its taste or purposes?

A: Yes.

Q: (Andromeda) So our souls can cause mutations?

A: Yes.

Q: (Perceval) Does that happen pre-birth?

A: No, it can happen once the soul is seated and as needed.

Q: (L) So, what are some of the processes that can effect this in a physical way?

A: Diet is one. Also "arrangement" to contract the needed sickness.

Q: (Pierre) So you contract a sickness because the soul wants to learn something and experience something, and it's through this sickness that this learning will occur?

A: No. The soul and its helpers wants to trigger DNA modification!

Q: (L) They're saying no, that it's far more pragmatic. Okay, next question... I'm never going to get to my questions that I have! [laughter] Okay, when you say, "the soul and its helpers", what the heck are the soul's helpers?

A: Tribal unit members both in the body and out.

Q: (L) So if you're a member of a tribal unit, you are in a way connected via DNA connections or signals or frequencies with your other tribal members, whether they are incarnated or not? Is that what we're saying here?

A: Pretty much; no man is an island!

Q: (L) Okay, now, let me get back to my questions. In the rest of this session excerpt I have here, I asked:

---
Q: What does the rest of the DNA code for that is not coding for structural genes. What else can it be doing?

A: Truncated flow.

Q: Truncated flow of what?

A: Liquids.

Q: Liquids from where to where?

A: What is your sense?

Q: Well, what liquids?

A: Time for your input.

Q: Do some of these...

A: No. Not alright: we asked you a question!

Q: Okay. Truncated flow of liquids. I'm not even sure what that means. (A) Maybe something was flowing and something cut it off and stopped it and it cannot be developed. It means that something was cut. (L) Does truncated flow mean a flow of liquid that has been stopped?

A: Yes. Because of design alteration!

Q: Is this liquid that has been truncated a chemical transmitter?

A: Yes.

Q: And would this chemical transmitter, if it were allowed to flow, cause significant alterations in other segments of the DNA?

A: Yes.

Q: So, there is a segment of code that is in there, that is deliberately inserted, to truncate this flow of liquid, which is a chemical transmitter, or neuropeptide, which would unlock significant portions of our DNA?

A: Close Biogenetic engineering.

Q: I assume that this was truncated by the Lizzies and cohorts?

A: Close, but more likely Orion STS designers.

Q: Okay, can you tell us what this specific liquid or transmitter was truncated?

A: Think of the most efficient conductor of chemical compounds for low wave frequency charge.

Q: (A) Well, gold is one... (L) Acetylcholine?

A: No.

Q: (L) Water?

A: No.

Q: Saline?

A: Closer. It is a naturally bonding combination.
---

(L) And then I gave up, because I was absolutely and completely clueless about where they were going, and I said I'd have to research it. And then, after I gave up on that line, I asked:

---
Q: Was my insight that I had one night that, at some point in time something may happen that will turn genes on in our bodies that will cause us to physically transform, an accurate perception of what could happen at the time of transition to 4th density?

A: For the most part, yes.

Q: Are there any limitations to what our physical bodies can transform to if instructed by the DNA? Could we literally grow taller, rejuvenate, change our physical appearance, capabilities, or whatever, if instructed by the DNA?

A: Receivership capability.

Q: What is receivership capability?

A: Change to broader receivership capability.

Q: (A) That means that you can receive more of something.

A: Close.

Q: (A) It means how good is your receiver.

A: Yes.

Q: (L) What is your receiver? The physical body?

A: Mind through central nervous system connection to higher levels.
---

(L) So this takes us back to what they were just saying a minute ago about the soul being able to change DNA itself, or with its tribal unit helpers; that is, you can change your DNA through "Mind through central nervous system connection to higher levels." Now then, going back to this little bit right here about the naturally bonding combination, "the most efficient conductor of chemical compounds for low-wave frequency charge." Well, in another session they made the remark that DNA was a superconductor, and that DNA could also have a core of light. Now, what just happened to make me start thinking about all this was that there was an article:

---
http://www.sott.net/article/286892-Viruses-convert-their-DNA-into-liquid-form-to-facilitate-cell-infection

Viruses convert their DNA into liquid form to facilitate cell infection

Viruses can convert their DNA from solid to fluid form, which explains how viruses manage to eject DNA into the cells of their victims. This has been shown in two new studies carried out by Lund University in Sweden.

Both research studies are about the same discovery made for two different viruses, namely that viruses can convert their DNA to liquid form at the moment of infection. Thanks to this conversion, the virus can more easily transfer its DNA into the cells of its victim, which thus become infected. One of the studies investigated the herpes virus, which infects humans.

"Our results explain the mechanism behind herpes infection by showing how the DNA of the virus enters the cell", said Alex Evilevitch, a researcher in biochemistry and biophysics at Lund University and Carnegie Mellon University.

Evilevitch stated that the discovery was surprising. No one was previously aware of the 'phase transition' from solid to fluid form in virus DNA. The phase transition for the studied herpes virus is temperature-dependent and takes place at 37°C, which is a direct adaptation to human body temperature. Evilevitch hopes that the research findings will lead to a new type of medicine that targets the phase transition for virus DNA, which could then reduce the infection capability and limit the spread of the virus.

"A drug of this type affects the physical properties of the virus's DNA, which means that the drug can resist the virus's mutations", said Alex Evilevitch.

The second study that Evilevitch and his colleagues have published recently is about bacteriophages, i.e. viruses that infect bacteria, in this case E coli bacteria in the human gastrointestinal tract. The results show that this virus also has the ability to convert its DNA from solid to fluid form. As with the herpes virus, the phase transition takes place at 37°C, i.e. adapted to human body temperature.

These two virus types, bacteriophages and the herpes virus, separated at an early stage in evolution, several billion years ago. The fact that they both demonstrate the same ability to convert their DNA in order to facilitate infection indicates that this could be a general mechanism found in many types of virus.

In previous studies, Alex Evilevitch and his colleagues have succeeded in measuring the DNA pressure inside the virus that provides the driving force for infection. The pressure is five times higher than in an unopened champagne bottle. This high pressure is generated by very tightly packed DNA inside the virus. The pressure serves as a trigger that enables the virus to eject its DNA into a cell in the host organism. It was this discovery that led to the two present studies, which were recently published in Nature Chemical Biology and PNAS.
---

(L) So, liquid DNA... What we have here is a little bit of a confirmation of what the C's were saying way back when, that DNA can turn from a solid to a liquid – the truncated liquid reference in the context of genetic engineering - to infect a cell. But we also know that DNA can also produce beneficial changes. The likelihood is that we have DNA that infected us at some point in time. It truncated the flow of some other DNA that's in our cells already there, but it isn't doing anything because it's been blocked by an infection that inserted introns of blockages. The possibility exists, I am surmising, that at some point in time, this could be changed or reversed possibly - probably - virally. Now, am I on to something here?

A: Oh indeed! The times ahead will be most interesting especially if the network both expands to the full tribal unit strength, and many others take the initiative to move up to the next stair step.

Q: (L) So, in a sense, what you're saying is that there is a need for the network to expand as in connecting chakras and so forth which is probably what helps with these “helper” things described a few minutes ago. When people are connected, they can help each other, both in and out of the body to make DNA changes and changes in their whole system. So, that's important. Also, people need to graduate when they get these DNA changes going on in their bodies that are helped by their helpers because of their connecting chakras because the network has strength. Does that make sense, everybody?

(Pierre) More members, and...

(L) And more involved, more doing.

(Chu) Not necessarily quantity, though. Because it says strength.

(Perceval) Well, that's the question: What is the full tribal unit strength?

(L) Does that means quantity, and/or quality?

(Data) Or both?

A: Both.

Q: (Pierre) So when you reach this critical mass, it means you can have this influence, you can have this soul group influence on all the members and trigger these changes?

(L) Is that what you're saying here?

A: Yes!

Q: (L) When the tribe reaches critical mass, it'll start changing people's DNA.

(Pierre) We'll start to change, and grow arms, and tentacles, and extra eyes... [laughter]

(Perceval) And fur!

(Kniall) Pierre, you can hold four tools at once!

(Chu) And if many others move up to the next stair step, that leaves more room for new people to come up.

(L) So, it's very, very important if people want to make this transition to be like the wise virgins: keep the faith, and keep doing, keep putting one foot in front of the other day after day even though they don't see any immediate benefits for themselves. Is that what we're getting to here?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Okay.

(Perceval) Does the full tribal unit strength have anything to do with Gurdjieff's mention of 200 people?

A: Close enough.

Q: (L) And there was something else I wanted to ask that you guys made me think of... I had something, and it slipped out of my brain. I'm having a senior moment... OH! Is this full tribal unit strength capacity kind of what you meant way back when when you talked about "broader receivership capability", that it's not simply restricted to an individual, but that it's like creating a net that is kind of like an array of antennas that...

(Perceval) The signal received is spread throughout the array...

A: Yes yes yes!

Q: (L) Okay.

(PoB) This full tribal unit strength that affects progress and changes DNA and so on, does it happen progressively, or is it like yes or no?

(L) You mean like on or off?

(PoB) Yes.

A: Critical mass much involved.

Q: (L) So you have to hit a critical mass before it switches.

(Andromeda) So it's more like on/off.

(L) I would say there are SOME individual cumulative things, but the big changes depend on critical mass.

A: Yes.

Q: (L) So we can each be working on ourselves individually with diet, cold therapy, with our networking, with getting rid of our emotional baggage, learning how to get along, etc. But all of that is really just kind of like preparatory for a phase transition?

A: Yes.

Q: (Pierre) And how many percent of this full tribal strength have we reached right now? [laughter]

A: Not enough obviously.

Q: (PoB) Will we know when we reach it?

(Perceval) Yeah, Pierre will grow a tentacle.

A: You will know indeed!

Q: (L) Alright.

(Chu) "Not enough" is the new percentage measurement.
 
Re: Collingwood's Idea of History, Speculum Mentis & Gurdjieff's Primitive Cosmology

I started to read Idea of History. I am still at the beginning.
At the beginning, it was hard read to me but as I was going through pages and as I get in the matter it became easier and very interesting. Very often I must get back for a few pages or paragraphs and reread again some part that I didn't understand at first but it is an interesting read and I am still around 60-th page.
 
Re: Collingwood's Idea of History, Speculum Mentis & Gurdjieff's Primitive Cosmology

Merci pour tous vos échanges si instructifs...
J'ai attaqué "Le nouveau Léviathan" de R.G. Collingwood après avoir terminé son livre "Toute Histoire est Histoire de Pensée"...
Pour moi aussi la lecture paraissait difficile au début puis de plus en plus limpide...

Thank you for all your exchanges so instructive ...
I attacked R.G. Collingwood's "The New Leviathan" after completing his book "All History is Thought History" ...
For me too reading seemed difficult at first and then more and more clear ...
 
Re: Collingwood's Idea of History, Speculum Mentis & Gurdjieff's Primitive Cosmology

PERLOU said:
Merci pour tous vos échanges si instructifs...
J'ai attaqué "Le nouveau Léviathan" de R.G. Collingwood après avoir terminé son livre "Toute Histoire est Histoire de Pensée"...
Pour moi aussi la lecture paraissait difficile au début puis de plus en plus limpide...

Thank you for all your exchanges so instructive ...
I attacked R.G. Collingwood's "The New Leviathan" after completing his book "All History is Thought History" ...
For me too reading seemed difficult at first and then more and more clear ...

That's the great thing about this kind of reading project: yes, it seems hard at first, but with persistence, things begin to clear up. And the beauty of that is the fact that this feeling of things beginning to "clear up" means that new synapses are forming and the architecture of the brain is changing!!! It's probably one of the most useful things a person can do: think with a hammer!
 
Re: Collingwood's Idea of History, Speculum Mentis & Gurdjieff's Primitive Cosmology

Laura
"the most efficient conductor of chemical compounds for low-wave frequency charge."
Fascinating. So I will assume ( :scared:) that this conductor has not been determined yet?

Is it likely a single substance, or a combination, formed in the body or ingested, generated through diet, heat / cold,
a combination of many things--or will this come about when our minds and bodies are prepared and then we are infected with the right virus that will "melt" away the truncating factors?

I am still working my way through Collingwood slowly but surely. I cannot condense a report for others yet but will go back through my highlighted sections over the holiday break and add to the
discussion. When I read truly NEW concepts it gives me a tingly feeling all over and a "oh wow" gush of emotions as it connects the dots--GEEK ALERT! :lol:
 
Re: Collingwood's Idea of History, Speculum Mentis & Gurdjieff's Primitive Cosmology

shellycheval said:
Laura
"the most efficient conductor of chemical compounds for low-wave frequency charge."
Fascinating. So I will assume ( :scared:) that this conductor has not been determined yet?
Laura mentioned an idea for that here:

https://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,43133.0.html
 
Back
Top Bottom