We're Wrong About Materialism vs. Idealism

NOTE: The perspectives expressed by guests don't necessarily mirror my own. There's a versicolored arrangement of people on TOE, each harboring distinct viewpoints, as part of my endeavor to understand the perspectives that exist.

[georgegolitzin]

For the logical/analytical quality of Advaita Vedanta, see Bernardo Kastrup's recent conversation with Swami Sarvapriyananda at the Vedanta Society of NY, particularly the first 19 minutes or so, in which the latter summarizes his understanding of Advaita.

[Stephenskandhas]

Advaita is extremely logically based. That is actually why it is most predominant among vedantic traditions; it prevailed after a thousand years of debate - not because a scholar or academic said so.

[Cloninginvesting]

Good conversation thank You Curt, if some one tries to understand advaita vedanta or in the path of understanding will be literally shocked at first when he realizes the nature of reality. Then the mind always rejects it because after we were born we end up accumulating information from outside ( kind of make it and believe as the whole of society is involved it it) till you become adult. It is needs continuous practice and over come the mind's tricks to really understand what is happening within you and outside of you. One thing i can say is it frees ourselves from constant suffering. A person who has struggled / suffered a lot for lets say 30 - 40 years and once he realizes this it frees him and makes him relax and walk with ease in life. Also now with this freedom he can take more adventurous in life without fear. This whole philosophy is based on pure logic and reasoning and there is place for some belief.

[theduppykillah]

My man your channel is firing on all cylinders it’s “much watch” content high end intellect and entertaining to boot. Max respect

[newidealism]

This clip has a vibe like we are debunking a myth about Indian philosophy.

But it really just shows how immense and multifaceted Indian philosophy is.

It's no surprise vedanta has its Dr. Dennets and it's Dr. Dawkins's, etc.

(I remember as a kid excitedly reading a book about vedanta and being frustrated because a lot of it was rationality and none of the mysticism I was looking for, lol.)

It's no surprise what we in the west noticed *most* was that which contrasted against the prevailing western view.

All this talk about rationality and logic makes me think Prof Vaidya is concerned with fortifying himself against accusations of woo woo. I would do the same thing! It's no good to have people thinking a scholar of Indian philosophy is all spiritual and no rationality. It reminds me of Dr. Kastrup - he wants to make a contribution, so he fortifies himself with empirical rigor.

But in mystical traditions, too, logic and rationality play important roles. In the heart sutra, for example, the Buddha is using logic and rationality to explain the doctrine of non-self.

Anyway, the observation I wanted to share, Dr. Curt, is:

Maybe we were wrong to associate vedanta *primarily* with idealism, but idk if I'm comfortable with the way this seems to imply there's something wrong with the way we associate Vedanta with idealism. There's just more than one thing going on.

Thanks for this awesome channel, I follow several podcasts & your stuff is what I look forward to the most.

[Nonconceptuality]

Notice how he said, in reference to Vedanta: "The one that I work on." He didn't say: "The one that I practice."

Anand knows alot about Advaita, like a guy that reads everything he can about baseball. He knows all of the rules and the stats of all the players, but he himself doesn't play baseball very often.

There is a most efficient spiritual path. Ramana Maharshi, whom he didn't even mention, taught this path.

"Be rid of current thoughts, that is all." - R.M.

Instruction an academic is not likely to follow

[mattsapero]

I enjoyed this, but I do wish you’d made him stick to his agreement to define terms! Did he end up talking about Yogananda? His “Autobiography of a Yogi” and his lake shrine in pacific palisades played key roles in my development that led to my breakthrough experiences during which I found myself creating reality as if it was magic. My process includes deep meditation on the beach all day & as sunset approached, I combined “Energy Ecstasy” by Dr. Bernard Gunther & “Creative Visualization” by Shakti Gawain which unlocked the power within me. I urge others to give the above a try.

[mardeluwa]

Hi there Curt. Just want to say I am loving this shorter clips. They at the same time work as snippets/bait for the whole interview but also as an easy way to return to more specific points one would like to re-wacht. Thanks a lot for your hard work and kudos for the elegant way you manage your channel. 🙏

[konnektlive]

This guy has knowledge, I do as well as a scholar and lecturer in the philosophy of mind, with focus on Eastern traditions. However, what he lacks is the experience. He is approaching Vedanta in general, and the profound, mystical and beautiful tradition of Advaita Vedanta in particular from a very modern, textbook, cold, dry and sectarian lens. I honestly think he lacks any actual spiritual and/or metaphysical experience himself, hence his approach that is very generalised and overly scholarly. There is a REASON why Radhakrishnan chose to go with the Advaita tradition as his main focus, a very good reason. It has nothing to do with any agenda, or his personal opinion.

For those who are truly familiar with the Advaita Vedanta, it's very clear that that name "Advaita Vedanta" is simply a term used in India to refer to a very profound philosophy/spiritual tradition that existed at the time, (and way before Shankaracharya himself), not just in India, but also in Persia (underrated mysticism has similar ideas), in ancient Alexandria, and also in the Greco Roman world (Neoplatonism and the Plotinus's idea of "The One" is almost exactly the same approach) and in many other parts of the known world. Advaita Vedanta is far from being a local tradition only limited to some parts of India. Study the development and evolution of the Advaitic traditions and you'll realise that such tradition are NOT something static that was invented by an individual and became popular! Far from it. Vedantic traditions, just like the vast Neoplatonic traditions and the Sufi traditions are NOT religious sects or some religious branches and pop up here and there...

I'm afraid this guy's approach is simply very Eurocentric. I would rather listen to some ACTUAL Indian Vedanta masters in your program instead of such superficial talk.

[Meditation]

Hi Curt! You're channel is awesome! Your really covering so many topics you are a great completest covering literally everything! You method of keeping us as an audience is awesome! As fans of you we appreciate the deep discussions and just the flavor that you provide to us. ❤️🙏

[RickDelmonico]

I'm not an idealist or a realist, I'm a real enoughist.

[charlieord]

I did not grasp a word of that until kurt started speaking about todays sponser, the razor manufacturer, i have been shaving my head with traditional safety razors for the last 24 years, in an attempt to reach cosmic consciousness, so if any TOE listeners would like would like a podcast on zen and the art of head shaving for the academically challenged, like this comment and lets see if we can make it happen.

[glamdrag]

Hey Curt, just wondering if you've ever looked into Ken Wilber and his "Theory of everything", known as integral theory.
Just saw you mentioning that you're interested in theories of everything in general

[AquarianSoulTimeTraveler]

The Fibonacci sequence is the key to the universe one singularity looking into a mirror where it is split into two parts positive and negative now there is one that turns to two into 3 then those two added together make five and so on and so on. It's non-dual but it is dual and also a trifecta But ultimately just a singularity.

[ZippyLeroux]

Please mark short clip thumbnails as such, or better yet, do a separate clip channel.

My Watch Later playlist is balls deep with TOE videos, I'm about a month behind, and these represent the possibility of accidental spoilers.

[JagadguruSvamiVegananda]

Idealism:
Metaphysical Idealism is the view that the objective, phenomenal world is the product of an IDEATION of the mind, whether that be the individual, discrete mind of a personal subject, or otherwise that of a Universal Conscious Mind (often case, a Supreme Deity), or perhaps more plausibly, in the latter form of Idealism, Impersonal Universal Consciousness Itself (“Nirguna Brahman”, in Sanskrit).

The former variety of Idealism (that the external world is merely the product of an individual mind) seems to be a form of solipsism.
The latter kind of Idealism is far more plausible, yet it reduces the objective world to nothing but a figment in the “Mind of God”.
Thus, BOTH these forms of Idealism can be used to justify all kinds of immoral behaviour, on the premise that life is just a sort of dream in the mind of an individual human, or else in the consciousness of the Universal Mind, and therefore, any action that is deemed by society to be immoral takes place purely in the imagination (and of course, those who favour this philosophy rarely speak of how non-human animals fit into this metaphysical world-view, at least under the former kind of Idealism, subjective Idealism).

Idealism (especially Monistic Idealism), is invariably the metaphysical position proffered by neo-advaita teachers outside of India (Bhārata), almost definitely due to the promulgation of the teachings in the West of Indian (so-called) “gurus” such as Mister Venkataraman Iyer (normally referred to by his assumed name, Ramana Maharshi). See the Glossary entry “neo-advaita”.
This may explain why such (bogus) teachers use the terms “Consciousness” and/or “Awareness”, instead of the Vedantic Sanskrit word “Brahman”, since with “Brahman” there is ultimately no distinction between matter and spirit (i.e. the object-subject duality).
At the risk of sounding facetious, anyone can dress themselves in a white robe and go before a camera or a live audience and repeat the words “Consciousness” and “Awareness” ad-infinitum and it would seem INDISTINGUISHABLE from the so called “satsangs” (a Sanskrit term that refers to a guru preaching to a gathering of spiritual seekers) of those fools who belong to the cult of neo-advaita.

Although it may seem that in a couple of places in this treatise, that a form of Monistic Idealism is presented to the reader, the metaphysical view postulated here is, in fact, a form of neutral monism known as “decompositional dual-aspect monism” (“advaita”, in Sanskrit), and is a far more complete perspective than the immaterialism proposed by Idealism, and is the one realized and taught by the most enlightened sages throughout history, especially in the most “SPIRITUAL” piece of land on earth, Bhārata. Cf. “monism”.

N.B. The Idealism referred to in the above definition (and in the body of this book) is metaphysical Idealism, not the ethical or political idealism often mentioned in public discourse (e.g. “I believe everyone in society ought to be given a basic income”).
Therefore, to distinguish between sociological idealism and philosophical Idealism, the initial letter of the latter term is CAPITALIZED.

[babetteadrian]

How can I get notified about upcoming interviews in advance? I have subscribed but the Youtube notifications are always after the fact. Do I have to get onto some mailing list?

[nsc]

I think both are saying the same in different words and definitions. Consciousness or very basic awareness arises as a result of interactions among networks of particles on the quantum field. However, is it the truth? What is the truth? Isn't it just a human concept? What if the truth changes all the time depending on the interactions between whatever. Humans really want to know what's behind the curtain, but I don't think there is any end to this. It may be like a uroborous or who can know? But I don't think there can be something from nothing. Everything is a sum of all parts(known and unknown), including the emergent properties.

[Camelotsmoon]

They're the samething. Every mental thought is also a "physical" object, and every "physical" object is a thought.

By extension, you see whatever you believe.. everything you see outside your senses acts like a chameleon; it reflects back to you the reality you feel is out there from the inside. Belief is important, because those are the things you act upon, so you receive more of it on the "outside" as you believe it more and more. You have access to everything the universe does, because we and it are all one.

Everything on the "outside" exists but isn't real, you (your awareness) is real, but doesn't actually exist. Everything that happens to you is real, but only because you (your awareness) is real. One thing that really got me (that also deals with awareness) was when I realized that, if I can imagine a scenario in my head and taste, touch, smell, see and hear things in my imagined image (especially all at the sametime)... Then whats the difference between the "outside" of me in the "physical" world and my imagined image? I've put my sensory organs into my head, and I exist somewhere else... I have access to everything already that exists... The secret to life is right infront of your face, so you don't notice it.

[gingerhipster]

He'd benefit from learning about Diana Walsh Pasulka. That's probably the fastest way to get him to understand that 🛸are real, and also representative of advanced technology that arises from something more akin to his ontology.