I’ve just finished Sam Harris’ book Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality without Religion. I highly recommend it, as it contains important insights both for materialists who would normally dismiss meditation/contemplation and for supernaturalists who mistakenly think that their inner experiences furnish evidence for metaphysical truths.
As Harris concisely and eloquently argues, attention
to the details of our inner lives is of supreme importance to human beings.
Learning to pay attention to consciousness gives us insights into the fact that
consciousness by its nature lacks a self: that is to say, our felt sense that
we are “separate” from our experiences is not true and isn’t even an illusion –
because if one looks closely and carefully enough, that sense is not there to
be found.
Harris points out that such attention loosens the
shackles that our emotions place upon us (he points out, for instance, how it
is impossible to remain angry for more than a few seconds if one is actually
paying attention to the experience of the present moment, instead of continually
manufacturing anger by rehearsing a mental story about grievances). He further
argues that experiences of self-transcendence have ethical implications – and while
Harris is not a Thelemite and does not use the jargon of Thelema (“True Will”),
his observations that attention to the present moment naturally settles the
clutter of one’s mental life can easily be appropriated in a Thelemic context.
With a mind thus settled, an aspirant will find it easier, practically by
definition, to perceive his or her authentic inclinations (i.e. “True Will”).Harris also points out the logical flaws in using such inner experiences to justify metaphysical claims, exploring the evidence that indicates that minds arise from brains and investigating how physical changes to brains – including during near-death experiences and drug trips – can cause experiences that resemble trances that meditation can induce more gradually and safely. He also discusses how unscrupulous gurus can take advantage of people and justify this behavior with some of the insights generated by meditation.
Some of the ideas covered in this book – and a short guided meditation – are presented in a very interesting talk Harris gave about “Death and the Present Moment,” which you can view here.
I highly recommend both the video and the book.
Yes, I love Sam Harris, and this book is great. I have come to believe however, that even Thelema is a waste of time. There is absolutely no need to call oneself a Thelemite or follow AC or any of it.
ReplyDeleteYes, I love Sam Harris, and this book is great.
DeleteSam is a joy to listen to. Even when I don't totally agree with him on an issue, I enjoy the way he thinks about things and expresses himself.
I also highly recommend his podcast.
I have come to believe however, that even Thelema is a waste of time. There is absolutely no need to call oneself a Thelemite or follow AC or any of it.
Well, obviously there's no ultimate "need" to call oneself anything or even do anything in particular. And I certainly wouldn't recommend "following" anyone, especially not Crowley.
Thelema is simply one framework among many for thinking about reality. Some of us find it useful and/or enjoy talking about it. That's reason enough to talk about it.
Yeah, I love his podcast too. I'm a huge fan of Harris and Hitchens, hell all of the atheists!
ReplyDeleteAnyway, don't you think that embracing Thelema is simply encouraging belief in the supernatural? Sure, you can argue AC didn't embrace the supernatural and most Thelemites are mistaken, but I think you could get across any point about life/reality without using it.
As you know Thelema means "Will", and if you agree with Sam Harris (I assume you do, and if not why?) we have no true free will. Needless to say, both "higher will", or "true will" don't exist. If you promote AC and Thelema, all you will do is lead many into a complicated mess of ideology that will confuse them, and many may come out "believers" and not skeptics.
I think you should move in the direction of Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens and promote reason and logic and secular Humanism, leaving this sort of Mumbo Jumbo far behind. I did.
Apologies for the lateness of my reply – real world stuff (all very good) has kept me busy.
DeleteAnyway, don't you think that embracing Thelema is simply encouraging belief in the supernatural?
Not if I’m clear that I don’t think the supernatural exists.
Sure, you can argue AC didn't embrace the supernatural and most Thelemites are mistaken, but I think you could get across any point about life/reality without using it.
Sure you could. Nobody is under any obligation to use the language or symbols of Thelema to talk about this stuff. I happen to know a lot about it, and I happen to find Crowley’s work very interesting, so here I am using it.
As you know Thelema means "Will", and if you agree with Sam Harris (I assume you do, and if not why?) we have no true free will.
Correct. If you’re interested, I have a blog post on free will, determinism, and Thelema:
http://thelema-and-skepticism.blogspot.com/2014/07/the-illusion-of-free-will.html
Needless to say, both "higher will", or "true will" don't exist.
Well, I disagree with you here, depending on what exactly you mean by those terms. The way I use “True Will” is simply to designate a person’s inclinations, as opposed to those things a person thinks he *ought* to do. That distinction exists whether or not we ultimately have free will, and I think it’s useful to make that distinction.
If you promote AC and Thelema, all you will do is lead many into a complicated mess of ideology that will confuse them, and many may come out "believers" and not skeptics.
I don’t agree. Someone could promote Newton and his science without promoting alchemy and Biblical interpretation (two other things Newton was quite keen on).
I can't stop people from interpreting Thelema in a wildly different way than I do, but I can try to be clear about what I mean when I write. Ultimately, that's all I can do.
leaving this sort of Mumbo Jumbo far behind. I did.
Are you by any chance the "JasonR" I used to encounter on various Thelemic forums? Last I saw, "JasonR" was talking about Sam Harris and free will at the ToT forums, so if you're not him, you have a doppelganger of some sort running around.
Assuming that you are the same person, I find the development of your thinking on these subjects encouraging.
No problem in regards to the late reply. I wasn't in a hurry, and as a matter of fact, it isn't even that important really. I just wanted to throw out my two cents, for whatever it was worth.
ReplyDeleteYes, I'm the same Jason from the TOT. I'd rather you forget about all that, to be honest, just as any atheist would rather his days at his old "Church" be forgotten.
My main point in asking you the question was, I don't feel it even merits your time even as a "non-believer" (or any other label you want to give yourself).
We can argue free will etc., but to me it's pointless. I will just say that I thought Sam Harris did a pretty bang up job explaining it (and you may find another debate or conversation of Sam with Dennett on his blog pretty interesting as well). There doesn't seem to be any way to argue your own view of free will either, to be completely honest.
It simply comes down to playing with the illusion of a free will at best. All those, "unnatural" or otherwise, "personal inclinations" aren't something a person is "following" or choosing to follow "wrongly" (figuratively speaking), but are actually just as authentic to him as any other arbitrary factor that makes up who he is.
I think AC with all his abstruse writing is just giving everyone pointless headache. Most of what you are trying to say and help people do (finding happiness, or fulfillment) can be done without any of the claptrap of Thelema.
Anyway, have a good one!