but this bundling of disparate theories only encourages a type of conceptual mysticism (ie the belief that ‘doing philosophy’ is a higher calling than just ‘thinking things through’.)

many disciplines (science, art, theology, whatever) like to label their theoretical underpinnings ‘philosophy of’ as if by doing so they form part of a quasi-mystical body of intelligent & perspicacious thought, distantly reinforced by a quasi-mystical desire for insightful human wisdom;

Philosophy (properly understood) is the application of critical thinking only (analysing ideas, presenting arguments, following scholarly rules &c); philosophy doesn’t have a creed or a belief system; its only goal is teaching how to think & analyse critically. Confusingly,

Double slit experiment: key implication: Basic experience (no matter what the phenomenon) is inherently unstable & ungraspable as a 'particularity/singularity' & this simple fact is way beyond most physicists as it undermines their belief in stable perception (what!?) as ontologically ultimate.

Mystics try to maximise their sense of divine communion, forgetting that ‘hacking divinity’ is only one aspect of our experiencing. Yet spiritual insight begins with the realisation that the answer to existence is not selecting parts of it we might happen to like, but querying it as a totality.

Point? You can observe your own death, just as you can observe your own life. (This is not doctrine; take a look & see - observe - for yourself.) Commonsense doctrine: life is like this & not like anything else, is a wilful disregard of the obvious.

Basic ontology of experience:
Limits on actuality are only momentarily, meaning that anything which appears singular & immutable is only apparently so; & if you observe experience objectively & persistently you can easily see that anything - rpt anything - can happen anytime, anywhere.

Insoluble problem: 'consciousness' is the elemental lucidity which informs us of 'what is what' & ergo can't be explained in terms of something more primordial than it; the idea that it can shows a misunderstanding of basic laws of thought. Yet not a problem for those arguing contingency theories.

(Free book download)
Adult spirituality in plain English, so an easy read.
(Free download here):
petereastman.substack.com/p/advanced-b...

And you can always buy a copy from Amazon:
amazon.com/dp/B08VYLP3NY

How can consciousness be contingent (that is, be causally dependent) on something consciousness is not only 'conscious of' but something which consciousness itself - as an empty, natureless 'revelatory capacity' – actually reveals to us in a revelatory presentation? Somebody help me out, please.

Yogananda: The Autobiography of a Yogi Classics of spiritual misdirection #7

The most extraordinary New Age book of all time? But it led so many of us into delusional, weak-minded mysticism.
(Article free to read)
Yogananda: The Autobiography of a Yogi
petereastman.substack.com/p/yogananda-...

Hacking happiness (many posts): regret futile. Only one thing to do in life = ‘engage’ ie get a purpose (any, no matter how silly) & then, using intelligent time management (ask Spike Lee) just do it! If after all that, life is still very shit, then tough: welcome to adulthood.

Went out into the garden late one evening last summer & some bats were swooping around in the darkness, & glancing up at them I knew exactly what it felt like to be a bat. (But if I had then thought philosophically I would suddenly have realised that I didn’t know what I knew.)

When it comes to spirituality, the Intellect (our capacity for impartial, objective & dispassionate judgements) is the ONLY guide we have; the heart & the soul & the imagination are impulsive, blind & misleading. Clarity of thought leads to the promised land; nothing else does.

‘The Buddhas say that Enlightenment cannot be attained because there is nothing to attain.’ Yes but you need first to attain the ‘unattainable’ to realise that truth; you are not ‘already a Buddha’ as your ordinary dumb self, as taught by various utterly moronic New Age sects.

Academic philosophy is currently unable to teach people to think objectively & independently & so be able to explore experiential existence with confidence & advantage; instead it teaches people to submit only to the musings of an authorised tradition.

One angle:
www.academia.edu/8090287/The_...

Philosophy - that is, using your intellect to maximum effect on received ideas - is a preparation (if you're lucky) for metaphysics - ie exploring the furthest reaches of existence; and if you can get that far, consolation (in life) is trivial; alcohol will do just as well.

‘Consciousness’ as an ‘identifiable’ something An exercise in primordial ontology - involving observation and reasoning

Consciousness illuminates anything & everything without revealing itself; it is truly an invisible capacity; so how can we even know it's there? By deduction only. Can it be felt? No; the imagination supplies feelings & we can feel those, but they're not consciousness itself.
tinyurl.com/2485h96s

Advanced Buddhist Metaphysics: Exercises in Sceptical Spirituality (Free pdf book download) A way out of endless religious delusion: this is a ruthlessly sceptical approach to all things spiritual & mystical, including Buddhism (!)

Academics! if you want ppl to read your scholarly book you'll have to give it away for free (as I'm doing) even if pub by a UPress they make a profit from subscription sales & after costs you get zero.(Ok New Age spiritual sh*t sells but that's different.)
petereastman.substack.com/p/advanced-b...

Adult spirituality starts here: abandon/shelve all beliefs & received ideas about God, Life, the Universe, everything & simply ask yourself: ‘what is existence?’ & ‘is there anything wrong with things as they are?’ Don’t turn to received ideas & dogma: look & see for yourself!

Went into the kitchen & found I had forgotten to buy peanuts for my vodka blowout. Idiot! Life ruined! Worse, I should have been reflecting on deep spiritual metaphysics, not raging over f*king peanuts. So? Thoughts, from most infantile to utterly divine are just more thoughts.

Yes!

Ground (base) yourself (intellectually) not with theories & doctrines & likes but rather with what you can see with your own mind’s eye; & if you can’t see anything, it’s because your education was defective & you were never taught how to think for yourself. But it’s never too late: start today.

Wittgenstein and ‘Certainty’ And the implications for ‘spiritual exploration’ as well as for philosophical metaphysics

Ontological uncertainty (now there's a thing!) always refuses to be put to bed by analytical clever-dickery.
petereastman.substack.com/p/wittgenste...

QM, string theory, relativity &c; those who look to physics for an 'insight into reality' need to grasp that science is wholly unrelated to ultimate human existential needs & concerns (fulfilment, insight, enlightenment) & might just as well be regarded as misleading gibberish.

A few minutes of quiet time (as meditation) is no problem but as a 'spiritual practice', hours of mind games is not a useful avenue to go down.

Krishnamurti explained: a critical study The acclaim accorded Jiddu ‘Krishnamurti’ (1895–1986) — as an apparently major figure in our modern understanding of all things spiritual…

What on earth encouraged educated, thoughtful people to think that JK was a ‘no-nonsense guru’ with real ideas?

petereastman.substack.com/p/krishnamur...

Descent into darkness ? Meditation is a dangerous practice, as well as a waste of time But there is another way to tackle spirituality.

Meditation is a waste of time (truly):
petereastman.substack.com/p/descent-in...

Descent into darkness ? Meditation is a dangerous practice, as well as a waste of time But there is another way to tackle spirituality.

More on this here:

petereastman.substack.com/p/descent-in...

I Meditated 1 Hour For 30 Days To Joe Dispenza (& Here’s What Happened) The true highs, lows, and mystical

Meditation basically encourages the imagination to run wild & depending on the person, this can result in all kinds of problems, especially in someone who has a weak sense of normality. More importantly, mystical imaginings are not spiritual insights.
medium.com/new-earth-co...