Roman Krznaric: a talk on Seizing the Day


I would definitely want to buy that book if I saw it and so hope I do

Mags

Curiously, his mandala graphic has a distinctly “Eastern” … Chinese aesthetic … for a Western audience? For example … the Yin Yang symbol in the centre … Hmmm!

The notion of ‘spontaneity’ … seize the moment … is a pillar of Lao Tzu thought … Wu Wei … “Dao De Jing”

carpediem.click/01/

carpediem.click/02/

carpediem.click/03/

carpediem.click/04/

carpediem.click/05/

carpediem.click/06/

carpediem.click/07/

What aspect of the book has made you want to buy it? I have linked to the summarised short essays of each chapter in my previous email below, and will be reading them now myself.

7 down, and 3 to go.

Krznaric does mention that the origins of the notion were around millennia ago, and even beyond then… I guess the mandala/Yin Yang symbols is an ode to that.

To me, Western philosophy just seems to always be a reworded offering of the pre-existing concepts and ideas that have always been around since the beginning of the arrival of a conscious man, and to that end philosophy is simply transient.

When do you see this guy in action?

In what respect do you mean WendyD?

Did you see him in person?

Yeah … maybe some day we will all acknowledge that we drink from the same “fountain”. :slight_smile:

He seemed to be a familiar favourite with the crowd, but new to me… but I am sure that we at the group will see him again for his next talk. I did not stay for the 2nd half/the discussion part of the talk, so I will just have to put my debating steez on hold till the group’s next talk.

As I asked for a mandala card on my way out he said… I hope you feel better soon, I said… Hey, thanks. A historical moment for him I’m sure. :laughing:

…but the divide and conquer application has put paid to that, starting from back when rising kingdoms started trading with each other… swapping monetary payment for rustling and then downright blatant thievery… I think that one of the 4 barriers on Krznaric’s mandala covers that.

And that is the precedent that brought us to this present day.

There’s always the possibility it will all change tomorrow. :smiley:

Since we are animals … seems logical to expect that our animal nature would bring us to where we are today. We simply need to wait for the cosmic event that will lift us out of … place us beyond … transform … our animal nature to a spiritual nature.

Not in this lifetime… not in the distant future… probably never…

Mags … you’re probably right … yet … as you wrote in another OP on the theory of the Omega Point … it’s a beautiful image. :slight_smile:

Looks like a nice guy. I can see in his eyes that he really cares about me. Something you cannot see in zinnat’s eyes even though he ends each one of his posts with “with love, sanjay”.

…sounded like a nice guy… the familiar to-him crowd seemed taken with him, so your observation is sound enough, and he did found the world’s first Empathy Museum and the digital Empathy Library.

Why did Zinnat eventually fall out of favour with near everyone? and why did he come to mind to you to mention here now?

An ode to the foreseeable demise of man through limitations set upon himself through blinkered eyes and covered ears and hurt pride?

image.jpeg

Mags … how do you find all these “gems”?

Prompted by your post I read a bit about Santayana. I immediately fell in love with his quote:

[b]

[/b]

Also triggered a memory:

Isaiah 25:7

[b]

[/b]

I prefer the word “veil” to shroud.

In the 2,500 years or so since Isaiah the veil has not been lifted … yet one could argue the material the veil is made of has become less opaque … more transparent. Ergo … we know much much more today.

Why wouldn’t this process continue until the entire shroud/veil has been lifted?

People who say or suggest in some way that their compassion has no bounds are hypocritical. They do that [preach universal compassion] merely to make themselves feel safe in a world which does not care. This is a problem because by doing so you blind yourself to reality, namely, that some organisms, perhaps even most if not all of them, do not care about you. That they quite simply don’t need you and that you can do little to nothing about it.

They also tend to confuse empathy with sympathy. When they speak of empathy, for example, they always speak of sympathy. They should use that word instead. Somehow, they fail to understand that empathy is nothing more than the ability to perceive other people’s feelings. Empathy does not establish how one should react to other people’s feelings. For example, it does not entail accepting other people’s feelings and/or problems as your own and then doing your best to resolve them. That would be sympathy (which literally means “feeling the same as the other”.)

George Santayana quotes seem to suit your philosophical needs well too. :slight_smile: I’d say you share a similar disposition… well, on paper at least.

People and nations find comfort under shrouds of certainty… lift the veil and they will run to the next available one to them… it seems to be a current global phenomenon right now.

George’s quote makes a good case in point:

_
…aptly revisited… tbc