Philosophical Dialogue with Pierre Grimes

Pierre Grimes, PhD, is a specialist in classical Greek philosophy. He is the founder of the American Philosophical Practitioners Association. He is also founder of the Noetic Society in the Los Angeles area. He is author of Philosophical Midwifery: A New Paradigm for Understanding Human Problems, Socrates and Jesus: A Dialogue in Heaven, and Unblocking: Removing Blocks to Understanding. He is also a decorated veteran of the second world war.

Here he distinguishes between the practice of philosophical dialogue exemplified by Plato as opposed to that of Socrates. He emphasizes the importance of the Self in Plato's philosophy -- and how this unfolds through the different philosophical dialogues. He demonstrates how the dialogue process can bring people into a greater understanding of the Self as well as false notions of the Self.

New Thinking Allowed host, Jeffrey Mishlove, PhD, is author of The Roots of Consciousness, Psi Development Systems, and The PK Man. Between 1986 and 2002 he hosted and co-produced the original Thinking Allowed public television series. He is also past-president of the non-profit Intuition Network, an organization dedicated to creating a world in which all people are encouraged to cultivate and apply their inner, intuitive abilities.

(Recorded on September 11, 2018)

[grantlawrence]

Thanks for uploading these discussions with Pierre Grimes. RIP to a great thinker and great mind.

[fryingwiththeantidote]

Pierre is one of those thinkers that is always so incredibly relevant to whatever is going on in your life at the particular moment you get to hear him speak. True holographic wisdom

[devoshaneo]

Pierre Grimes is my favorite, much love and gratitude to you both. I always learn something new when you two get together.

[Fitzangus]

I was fortunate as a young man to have taken a few classes Dr Grimes taught and engaged with him. in dialogue. This lead to a deeper understanding of the value of the dialectic. Later I was equally fortunate to have known and studied with Prof Allan W Anderson known for his work with Krishnamurti. One thing leading to another fifty years of Zen practice and dialogue. I was so happy to see Pierre so alive and well, mind as always clear as temple Bell at sunrise. Now my son is getting his Ph.D. in philosophy, I may need Pierre 's help to remove the academic fungus form the philosophy beneath.

[fredrickjoseph]

Nice interview Jeffrey....and Pierre's mind is as sharp as a razor blade....what a typical example of a wise old man!

[walterbraun]

Fantastic dialogue!
At 15:17 mins I felt tears of joy (and I am not one known to well up easily). A profound demonstration of the power dialogue, once we are willing to bracket our assumptions (in a given question). Platonic philosophising felt so real, instead of conducting a dry intellectual exercise that leads nowhere (or at best to a dogma that others will be keen to attack to show off their intellectual prowess).
To the Church of Scientism the self is unreal, like a shadow following a biological machine programmed for pointless survival by a senseless nature within a meaningless universe. And this shadow of a shadow is yet powerful enough to destroy humankind, our planet even? Explain this, reductionists!
Thank you very much Pierre, and thank you Jeffrey for enabling this lively demonstration!

[dauber]

What a joy, thank you for this and all your videos Mr.Mishlove

[danielduarte]

I loved the conversation and I loved the dialogue. We normally don`t see people really doing philosophy. I liked how Jeffrey engaged in the conversation. It could be very easy for him to avoid the questions but he really applied himself to it. It requires intellectual honesty. Thank you so much, Jeffrey and Pierre.

[andra]

If one were to come and state how upset and confused they were from "another version" of themselves that "took over" and did something that they were horrified by and were confused. i would ask them... "is that "person/thing" that you consider "another version" really another version?" What is it that remained the same through the actions?


Additionally: One is to ask "why" there are different expressions of the "Self", and why the "Self" may have different "vessels" to express the "Self". I ask, the question of "why" itself in regards of the self is routed in the contemplations of man. If you ask "why" there are different vessels that represent the "Self", then you ask "WHY" does the sun rise to the east and fall to the west? Is there a "why" outside of the human psyche?

[ThaTurdBurglar]

This conversation is quite the blossoming drama itself! Leaving us on a high note with many questions still

[nickgangadis]

A trully amazing conversation, gentlemen. I wish I could listen to you talking for ever. It's really an awakening experience.

[simpleuser]

Conversations like these are unheard of in our world of the anti-intellectual circus we have called the world.

[ADBCSH-jeuj]

Thank you brothers, for this open and spontaneous format. To hear is to also participate in the quest for intelligibility. Perhaps the answer as to why there are separate individual manifestaions of the ONESELF, is actually observable in the dynamic of the dialogue. It is the interactive nature of the Logos itself... it is to express LOVE in LIFE... the ONE in the many. This is BEAUTY itself and it could be known no other way!

[Venusiantrip]

Thank you both for sharing such dialogue with us. I liked that.

[PhilosopherXable]

Great dialogue! Peace,
Philosopher X 👍 👍 😆

[benbishop]

Really impressed by this unfolding conversation. Opened my mind with a whole lot to think about.

[adamlane]

This dialogue brought me to tears. So profoundly synchronistic at this point in my life. Thank you Gentlemen, thank you!

[ginganinga]

language was not created for survival, but created to find out who one is.

[amanitamuscaria]

Pierre on Aristotle please, pretty please

[FreedomandRightsUS]

Great video as usual from these two. One of the few things that puzzles me is Pierre when mentioning Plato and Aristotle. I hope one day to find some material where he goes over their differences because from only a brief skimming of Thomas Taylor I'm given the impression that they just took opposite ends to account for everything - physically accounting for the theological from Aristotle and theologically accounting for the physical in Plato. I don't know to what end or if they deviate after a certain point but I'm hopeful something or someone will come along and set me straight with a beautiful demonstration via dialectic someday.