Collingwood's Idea of History & Speculum Mentis

[Anthony]

Re: Gurdjieff's Primitive Cosmology

A few thoughts after reading some parts of Speculum Mentis.

Man is interested in knowledge in general as a guide to action, to know what to do. He can experience life in a couple of ways or forms: art, religion, science, philosophy etc. All of these forms claim to be a proper way of arriving at the ultimate truth about existence. I guess we can say that they correspond to the functioning of our centers, thinking, feeling, moving. The proper way for human progress is not an exclusive focus on either one of these forms, but developing them as much as possible in our life, understanding that they are interrelated and follow one from another.

If we have a purely materialistic ('scientific') outlook on the world, our actions and relationships to reality will be limited by that form of experience. It seems that Collingwood is providing a map so that we don't get stuck in either one of these forms to the exclusion of others, a sort of a bird's eye view of the terrain.

 

[Laura]

Re: R. G. Collingwood: The Idea of History

I'm just about finished the book. The quote below from the book struck me as interesting as I was reading.

But there is a third alternative. In realizing its own rationality, mind also realizes the presence in itself of elements that are not rational. They are not body; they are mind, but not rational mind or thought. To use an old distinction, they are psyche or soul as distinct from spirit. These irrational elements are the subject-matter of psychology. They are the blind forces and activities in us which are part of human life as it consciously experiences itself, but are not parts of the historical process: sensation as distinct from thought, feelings as distinct from conceptions, appetite as distinct from will. Their importance to us consists in the fact that they form the proximate environment in which our reason lives, as our physiological organism is the proximate environment in which they live. They are the basis of our rational life, though no part of it. Our reason discovers them, but in studying them it is not studying itself. By learning to know them it finds out how it can help them to live in health, so that they can feed and support it while it pursues its own proper task, the self-conscious creation of its own historical life.

At first thought, I thought Collingwood could be describing the System 1 of Kahneman. Thinking about it he could also be describing the Predator mind and/or programs. Seems that Collingwood is saying to use the reasoning rational mind to see and understand these irrational parts of ourselves in order to enable the rational mind (System 2 or real I) to take control and form the basis for how we act in life.

Yes, at least partly. It is also a very good description of the process of getting to know your machine, self-observing and "remembering the self" as Gurdjieff would have it. Only Collingwood has put the matter much more clearly.

As for the "partly" part of my response: a book I've just finished which is very helpful is Glenn and Raines "Psychopathy: An Introduction to Biological Findings and Their Implications". Note the "biological findings" part of the title. That is what is so furiously interesting in this book. Even though he is after psychopathy, one learns a LOT about the brain, including what might be called "normal" though even that is problematic. I would say that this book is very important for learning about the machine. It also puts Kahnemann's and Wilson's work in a different perspective. It shows that even our so-called "system 2" or "real I" may not be exactly what we might like to think it is.

 

[Laura]

Re: R. G. Collingwood: The Idea of History

I agree that knowledge is not limited due to its materiality. However, I can easily see where G came up with this just by observation, especially in the run-up to WWI and WWI itself which was a stupendously insane time. Kind of an Occam's razor thing: he looked around and saw a world going mad and on an individual level found the people around who he spotted as potentially aware to be severely lacking in knowledge. So it would not have been much of a stretch to come to the conclusion: there is so little knowledge around...it must be limited. Of course this idea that knowledge is limited because it is a rare material may also have been one of his Jedi mind tricks with a particular aim in sight (to awaken people to look for knowledge).

On another note, I don't think knowledge can really be suppressed. Sure, lies, misinformation and false knowledge can be put forward, and genetics/physicality can be manipulated but none of this limits a persons inner search for knowledge.

Does it really matter why knowledge seems to be rare? The embedded assumption/hope is that if knowledge is limitless, all we need to do is remove the impediments in people's minds, hearts and souls and humanity will rise up en masse with real knowledge. But, if a paltry 144K out of 6 or 7 Billion is a great harvest indeed, well....

It seems bizarre to me that Gurdjieff came to this conclusion about knowledge. It really isn't rational considering other things he wrote/said. In fact, he could have come up with a better explanation just based on his "Law of Octaves" thing where he talks about how things go along and, without shocks, turn around to the opposite of what they started. Why did he have to declare that knowledge was material and limited when he had a perfectly good other model?

Anyway, the Zoroastrians had a much better explanation for this cycle when they said that the rule of the Earth and humanity alternates between Ohrmazd and Truth/order and Ahriman and The Lie/Chaos.

The Cs have said that it is all about balance, that things swing back and forth over vast periods of time and that there are cycles within cycles that work this way. They also talk about objective reality vs wishful thinking which is, I think, just a form of The Lie.

So, all in all, Gurdjieff's explanations on this topic are really quite limited and limiting to say the very least.

 

[SocietyoftheSpectacle]

Re: R. G. Collingwood: The Idea of History

On one occasion Ouspensky and Gurdjieff discussed the possibility of School Spreading knowledge under Ideal conditions.

I think Gurdjieff was basing his theory of the limitation's of Knowledge on Experience of people around him.

Like the Spread of Knowledge that took place when the printing press was invented.
Gurdjieff had not anticipated the internet,
or even the potential of the Mass media.
Though to be sure early film and radio left much to be desired if looked at as a knowledge spreading medium.

I take into consideration Rodney Collins theory that Neptune aligning with the galactic centre leads to an Increase in Spirituality among people.
This didnt take place until around 1970.

 

[Laura]

Re: R. G. Collingwood: The Idea of History

I take into consideration Rodney Collins theory that Neptune aligning with the galactic centre leads to an Increase in Spirituality among people.
This didnt take place until around 1970.

And the evidence is???

 

[shellycheval]

Re: R. G. Collingwood: The Idea of History

Thank you all who have finished reading "Idea of History" and are posting your thoughts and to those of you who are posting discussion as you are reading. It helps me digest what I am reading while I work through the text. I have always studied history formally and, mostly, informally, and have never thought there were different ways to define what actually constitutes "history" beyond a series of linear events interpreted and recorded "by the winners." It's fascinating.

 

[genero81]

Re: R. G. Collingwood: The Idea of History

As for the "partly" part of my response: a book I've just finished which is very helpful is Glenn and Raines "Psychopathy: An Introduction to Biological Findings and Their Implications". Note the "biological findings" part of the title. That is what is so furiously interesting in this book. Even though he is after psychopathy, one learns a LOT about the brain, including what might be called "normal" though even that is problematic. I would say that this book is very important for learning about the machine. It also puts Kahnemann's and Wilson's work in a different perspective. It shows that even our so-called "system 2" or "real I" may not be exactly what we might like to think it is.

That sounds like a book I'm going to want to read.

 

[SocietyoftheSpectacle]

Re: R. G. Collingwood: The Idea of History

I take into consideration Rodney Collins theory that Neptune aligning with the galactic centre leads to an Increase in Spirituality among people.
This didnt take place until around 1970.

And the evidence is???

Appendix Thirteen.
PDF Link,
from holy Books.

Collin mentions 15 degrees Libra, But is often 30 years behind the major events.
Which Include ,
1 AD, Time of the Man who came to be called jesus,
480 AD The life of St benedict,
1122-1152 Abbot Suger of St. Denis leading French statesman.
1115 Chancellor Bernard reorganises cathedral school at Chartres: cathedral
schools of music at Rheims, of astronomy at Mont St. Michel. 1118 Foundation
of the Knights Templars in Palestine by Hugh des
Payens and Godfrey de St. Omer. ca 1125 Arrival of Catharists
from the East in Toulouse and Orvieto. ca 1100 - 1135

a 1450 - 1500 Schools of painting in Italy.
1442 - 1458 John of Cologne builds towers of Burgos cathedral: Milan cathedral
in progress.
1446 Bursfelde congregation of German Benedictine monasteries. 1450
Bohemian and Moravian Communion of Brethren formed.
http://www.holybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/The-Theory-of-Celestial-Influence.pdf

And also check Saturn in Gemini and the cycle of War,
Incredible correspondance with the 1st, and 2nd world War,
the american War of independence ,the french revolution, and more.

 

[John G]

Re: R. G. Collingwood: The Idea of History

I take into consideration Rodney Collins theory that Neptune aligning with the galactic centre leads to an Increase in Spirituality among people.
This didnt take place until around 1970.

And the evidence is???

Appendix Thirteen.
PDF Link,
from holy Books.

Collin mentions 15 degrees Libra, But is often 30 years behind the major events.
Which Include ,
1 AD, Time of the Man who came to be called jesus,
480 AD The life of St benedict,
1122-1152 Abbot Suger of St. Denis leading French statesman.
1115 Chancellor Bernard reorganises cathedral school at Chartres: cathedral
schools of music at Rheims, of astronomy at Mont St. Michel. 1118 Foundation
of the Knights Templars in Palestine by Hugh des
Payens and Godfrey de St. Omer. ca 1125 Arrival of Catharists
from the East in Toulouse and Orvieto. ca 1100 - 1135

a 1450 - 1500 Schools of painting in Italy.
1442 - 1458 John of Cologne builds towers of Burgos cathedral: Milan cathedral
in progress.
1446 Bursfelde congregation of German Benedictine monasteries. 1450
Bohemian and Moravian Communion of Brethren formed.
http://www.holybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/The-Theory-of-Celestial-Influence.pdf

And also check Saturn in Gemini and the cycle of War,
Incredible correspondance with the 1st, and 2nd world War,
the american War of independence ,the french revolution, and more.

Wars happen all the time and what events are major is rather subjective (this is a rather arcane list of major events). Even the random digits of pi can produce say nine nines in a row (at position 500 and some million). I think the Cs mentioned things like astrology, tarot, etc. readings are mostly related to the abilities of the reader. I take that to mean something like how good the reader is at setting up a Jungian synchronicity of sorts between their thoughts and the divination device.

 

[Laura]

Re: R. G. Collingwood: The Idea of History


What I asked for was EVIDENCE for increase of spirituality of people.

 

[lilies]

Re: R. G. Collingwood: The Idea of History

I agree that knowledge is not limited due to its materiality. However, I can easily see where G came up with this just by observation, especially in the run-up to WWI and WWI itself which was a stupendously insane time. Kind of an Occam's razor thing: he looked around and saw a world going mad and on an individual level found the people around who he spotted as potentially aware to be severely lacking in knowledge. So it would not have been much of a stretch to come to the conclusion: there is so little knowledge around...it must be limited. Of course this idea that knowledge is limited because it is a rare material may also have been one of his Jedi mind tricks with a particular aim in sight (to awaken people to look for knowledge).

On another note, I don't think knowledge can really be suppressed. Sure, lies, misinformation and false knowledge can be put forward, and genetics/physicality can be manipulated but none of this limits a persons inner search for knowledge.

Does it really matter why knowledge seems to be rare? The embedded assumption/hope is that if knowledge is limitless, all we need to do is remove the impediments in people's minds, hearts and souls and humanity will rise up en masse with real knowledge. But, if a paltry 144K out of 6 or 7 Billion is a great harvest indeed, well....

It seems bizarre to me that Gurdjieff came to this conclusion about knowledge. It really isn't rational considering other things he wrote/said. In fact, he could have come up with a better explanation just based on his "Law of Octaves" thing where he talks about how things go along and, without shocks, turn around to the opposite of what they started. Why did he have to declare that knowledge was material and limited when he had a perfectly good other model?

Anyway, the Zoroastrians had a much better explanation for this cycle when they said that the rule of the Earth and humanity alternates between Ohrmazd and Truth/order and Ahriman and The Lie/Chaos.

The Cs have said that it is all about balance, that things swing back and forth over vast periods of time and that there are cycles within cycles that work this way. They also talk about objective reality vs wishful thinking which is, I think, just a form of The Lie.

So, all in all, Gurdjieff's explanations on this topic are really quite limited and limiting to say the very least.

I propose that there might have been a mistranslation from Armenian and Gurdjieff might have meant a Triad Term. A fatal combination of these three:

A very dangerous, combined term of Knowledge With Understanding And The Awareness Resulting from it.

I propose there is a limited amount of this dangerous combination on Earth, for a very simple reason: The Control System limits it with lethal force, because too much of this combination could mean the overthrow of the very same Tyrannical Control System trying to keep itself running for eternity. If these pesky aware pheasants would be left to their own taboo-science devices, soon there would be no more Sheeple left on Earth to exploit!!

Remember how much difficulty G. had finding the correct terms in Western languages for the very special terms he knew?

Imagine yourself in G's shoes: you are an exceptionally Aware person, looking at and observing people in the state of delirium messing around, shouting at each other, getting in trouble in their daily "lives", gobling down toxic food and you - as Aware - see many solutions to the problems of these 'poor unfortunates'. Then you try to help them and try to name this triad combination of knowledge-understanding-awareness. Then people love abbreviate and simplify anything they refer to and in addition - in case of the Work - people are constantly fluctuating between Aware and Asleep states, so imagine the words and terms used, referring to this combination all the time, Awake or Asleep.

Knowledge, as long as it's the allowed kind, is okay. Any combination of knowledge with awareness and understanding is NOT allowed, I propose. Tesla, Cayce, Wilhelm Reich, Gurdjieff or doctors inventing revolutionary healing machines threatening Big Pharma, microbiologists threatening CDC/WHO, water-powered car inventors threatening Big Oil, anybody else you might know? The Control System effectively sprays pesticides on these people who have knowledge and became aware to dangerous degrees. Gurdjieff is car-crashed and shot multiple times. Scientists soft-killed, suicided, ruined, buried, forced to withdraw or change papers.

Look how knowledge is widespread around the world and the trouble it caused. Then look, how a large percentage of the population are machine-like authoritarian followers devoid of awareness. Even most of the educated people possessing all kinds of [allowed] knowledge are "willy or nilly" living without awareness. All these human groups are the significant inhibitors of any progress today towards accomplishing "The Aim" of the sane people: change this world to something "normal" for gods sake!

People just aren't waking up en masse - they don't acquire this combination or don't want to, or maybe can't, prevented to form in themselves the Triad Combination by the Control System?

Session 970719:

A: Laura, my dear, if you really want to reveal "many beautiful and amazing things," all you need to do is remember the triad, the trilogy, the trinity, and look always for the triplicative connecting clue profile. Connect the threes... do not rest until you have found three beautifully balancing meanings!!
Q: So, in everything there are three aspects?
A: And why? Because it is the realm of the three that you occupy. In order to possess the keys to the next level, just master the Third Man Theme, then move on with grace and anticipation.

 

[Pierre]

Re: R. G. Collingwood: The Idea of History

I finally finished reading 'The Idea of History' . It was not an easy read but it was very interesting. In part I to IV, I enjoyed the way Collingwood described the history paradigm held in various period of history and how this paradigm deeply shaped the way people saw the world.

More interesting was the way Collingwood explains how and why one history paradigm shifted into the following one. By the way progress in historical thinking was not linear at all and encountered several setbacks as far as getting as close to the truth is concerned.

Then came, the last part: epilegomena. While reading it I was reminded of Fustel de Coulanges masterpiece 'The Ancient City'. Fustel provides a striking practical application of Collingwood theory.

What Collingwood theorized as the way a proper historian should investigate: thinking now about the act of thinking that happened in the past, Fustel applied it brilliantly and succeeded in thinking the way ancient Greek and Roman people were thinking at the time, which is quite an incredible achievement given the limited amount of evidence and the context that has so drastically changed since then.

In this same final part, Collingwood exposes a fascinating idea: the understanding of history and the understanding of oneself are intimately related. You can’t have one without having the other. This was a ‘aha’ moment because it answered a question I had been asking myself for a while.

A few years ago I helped Laura writing some parts of ‘the horns of Moses’. We spent several months discussing sources, ideas, … HOM covered many interesting topics but the most interesting thing was not that. During the research/writing process I got more and more puzzled by the way Laura was thinking. How does she reach this or that conclusion? Why is she appealed to this source or that source? Why doesn’t she believe this historian while giving credence to that one?

It was quite fascinating, I even wanted to write an article about it but it never happened. Maybe because there was something missing to explain the thinking process.

Sure I could see part of the pictures: lot of reading and thinking, a tremendous memorizing power, a burning interest for finding the truth, lots of ‘connecting the dots’ and recognizing patterns’ but there was something else.

Then, Collingwood gave the answer. The true historian re-enacts today in his mind an act of the past, he think the way the historical character was thinking at the time. To do that the historian has to be able not to identify, not to project, not to let prejudice or subjectivity blur his analysis. Only the historian who knows the way he thinks can think the way others (including historical agents) think.

I realized that working on oneself, writing history, reading murder mysteries, helping community members, those four activities that seem so different and probably occupy most of Laura’s daily life were actually based on the very same principle: thinking about the act of thinking whether it is the thinking of oneself, a history character, a detective or a member.

 

[findit]

Re: R. G. Collingwood: The Idea of History

Great comments Pierre! Growing up, my history teachers were fact oriented and I never enjoyed taking history classes. Since joining this forum, I've been trying to catch up on all of these various ideas and threads. I have a new respect for history and all of the nuances involved discussing and deciding which path to follow. I think you should write an article about your experience. I would like to know the thought processes you discussed while working on the book.

 

[genero81]

Speculum Mentis

I was reading part 5: Science yesterday before work and it was bugging me that I wasn't quite sure what I had read in terms of fully comprehending it's meaning. I knew Collingwood was declaring an error to scientific thought and that this error carried over from religious thought, but I wasn't clear on what it was exactly. So I read it again this morning after a good nights sleep. I understand now that what he's getting at is that science, as it's practiced now as an empirical study of reality, is in error because it attempts to understand particulars in isolation from the whole which is an abstraction. It should be studied instead as particulars of a concrete whole or universal. This abstraction carries over from religious thought which views 'God' as perfect, whole and apart from the particulars of creation, which is an abstraction also. Hopefully I got that right.

Anyway, y'all can combine this with a thread already started or leave it separate. I just thought I might start the conversation.

 

[Laura]

Re: Speculum Mentis


One thing that stuck out for me was that he was saying that the IDEA that things could even be studied in parts was itself the primary abstraction that 'went wrong', so to say. Which is pretty much saying what you just said, only from a slightly different angle.

I had to read that part over a couple of times too separated by a night's sleep. It's subtle, but deep and significant.