Philosophy Now Forum

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 15, 2026 7:10 pm

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Sun Feb 15, 2026 4:51 pm One other thing, and really a principle thing, that we must take into consideration as we consider ‘soul’ ‘eternal soul’ ‘God’ and all aspects of metaphysics, is the psychological state of people today and, certainly, many of those who participate in this forum.

Why?

Good Heavens, Immanuel, I must say I am surprised by your question. However, I am aware that it is likely I am referring to an order of ideas, and possibly to a spiritual process, that you have not been exposed to and not thought about. This fits with your fixity in a specific fanaticism, but it seems to me that a wide-thinking religionist must have wider understanding under his belt.

In the Vedas -- and note that there is certainly a correspondence in Christianity since, technically, Jesus Christ is understood to be an Avatar of "Vishnu", i.e. of that aspect of God that provides salvific knowledge to man -- it is proposed and noted that "God-consciousness" is the beginning of all positive growth in man and humankind. You would explain and note this by reference to the Prophets and the idea of Revelation. There is a corresponding idea in the Vedas but, in my view in the Vedas there are far wider and deeper and more detailed metaphysical explanations.

How does it come about that men fall apart? That their psychic and psychological unity and well-being begins to fracture? Why do you suppose that today there is so much distress about what happens to people, to families, to cultural solidarity, to social agreements, when they lose (metaphysical) connection with those entities and forces I am describing loosely under the heading 'metaphysical'? It is certainly a Christian idea, very common and enunciated among the Turning Point crowd and in today's Evangelical communities, that when man loses contact and insight with God, that he loses himself. I do not subscribe to this idea in quite the way they do, but I think I could make at least a decent case for negative results when man loses a clear 'conceptual pathway' to, let's say, 'higher frequencies of understanding (Buddhi is the Sanskrit term referring to higher mind.)

Now, you know from many other conversations that I have tremendous respect for many Christian traditions, and certainly of Christian ethics, but that does not to me mean that they do a very good job of explaining, in modern terms, the relevance of clearly enunciated metaphysics. So you must understand that I am attempting not so much to knock down "Christian belief" but rather find a way to better explain on what it is constructed, or what lies at the real core of it.

Why would anybody's "psychological state" have anything to do at all with considering any of these things?

Immanuel, you always read badly. You can and must do better! I did not say that one should approach these issues from some particular 'psychological state' but only that today, for a range of reasons, many people suffer from psychological fracturation, and this fracture has causes, and the cases can be examined and catalogued, and one of them has to do with "loss of horizon" and loss of connection with 'restorative divinity'. This has been so much a part of many different intellectual and practical currents over the last 40-50 years.

Have you paid no attention to the myriad movements that developed as a result of The Death of God? (i.e. the death of the god-concept and ways to speak about God) Our entire world was changed at the turn of the 20th century with entire new, and some old, avenues of exploration. In psychology, esotericism, 'energy work', entire avenues of self-exploration. Jumping ahead we must consider even the 12-Step Programs as a means by which broken and collapsed people made efforts to discover and make conscious why they were so 'fucked up' and to bring a Higher Power into their lives for restoration.

You must be really disconnected with modern society if none of this is clear to you.

Are you telling us a truth? If you are, it can be presented.

For a man who "cannot hear -- for all that he has ears" I honestly am uncertain if you can understand what is being said. I am going to carry on though as if you could!

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 15, 2026 6:54 pm It needs to be done now, of course. How else are we to decide if you really have anything to say, or whether you're just complaining about everybody else, without having a reasonable view of your own? These things are not taken for granted -- and ought not to be, if we are thinkers.

I grant that you are, in your way, a thinker. But all of your thinking occurs within a constrained and limited environment: the fanatical belief of obsessive Evangelical Christianity. So, you might well need to break out of that restrictive shell even to be able to begin to understand certain ideas that are anathema to your established way of thinking.

Something is indeed being done. But one listener struggles mightily! I am not complaining about 'everyone else', I am remarking on aspects of your apologetic style (its abject failure) and also a structure of ideas that has you enthralled. I know that you are ultra-sensitive and very touchy if anything seems ad hominem to you, yet this is not that.

Let me put it this way (and I repeat): For longer than a decade you have been preaching here and you have made ZERO PROGRESS in either convincing or converting even one person. I say that this requires serious and dedicated examination. And Dr Alex Jacobi is in the house! I have waived all fees! It's pro bono up and down the line ...

I present some ideas. You must reject all of them! Or there is danger that your System collapses. You know this, I know this, and so does the "we" that you refer to all the time...

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Sun Feb 15, 2026 11:48 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 15, 2026 7:10 pm

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Sun Feb 15, 2026 4:51 pm One other thing, and really a principle thing, that we must take into consideration as we consider ‘soul’ ‘eternal soul’ ‘God’ and all aspects of metaphysics, is the psychological state of people today and, certainly, many of those who participate in this forum.

Why?

Good Heavens, Immanuel, I must say I am surprised by your question.

You shouldn't be. It's very obvious.

And the full question was, "Why would anybody's "psychological state" have anything to do at all with considering any of these things? " It does not.

In the Vedas

Say why you are convinced we should pay attention to the Vedas, if that's your base metaphysic.

"God-consciousness" is the beginning of all positive growth in man and humankind.

Why should we believe that's true?

How does it come about that men fall apart?

Finally, a really good question. Why do you believe the Vedas have the answer?

Have you paid no attention to the myriad movements that developed as a result of The Death of God?

Yes. I've read all sorts of that stuff, from Hume and Voltaire onwards...Nietzsche, Hardy, the Existentialists, and even the more up-to date stuff. I wonder if you've read the more recent stuff; because consensus today is that that movement is a failure. Not only has secularism not eliminated religiosity, but postmodernity as burgeoned into all kinds of new forms of belief. It seems that the death of God was declared quite prematurely.

And, of course, it wouldn't matter a fig what men thought, even if they were still spouting the "death of God" nonsense. God doesn't depend on consensus for His existence. He never did.

But back to my central question, repeated over and over and never yet having received an answer: what is the basis of your putatively "superior" metaphysic?

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Mon Feb 16, 2026 12:07 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 15, 2026 6:54 pm It needs to be done now, of course. How else are we to decide if you really have anything to say, or whether you're just complaining about everybody else, without having a reasonable view of your own? These things are not taken for granted -- and ought not to be, if we are thinkers.

I grant that you are, in your way, a thinker.

Great. Now, if you can, you prove the same to me...that you are a real thinker, rather than a mere rhetorician, perhaps. You need to justify your metaphysic. Are you merely disingenuous about having one? Or are you unable to do it at all?

IC wrote:Say why you are convinced we should pay attention to the Vedas, if that's your base metaphysic.

In order to earn the privilege of asking questions — I am not ungenerous — you must yourself complete some prerequisites. The first is to read and understand what has been stated so far and to indicate that you understand by repeating it back accurately.

Second: take what has so far been presented and respond to the totality.

You made a huge promise to Rick. Now make this very small promise to me (and to the “we” you refer to so often).

Game on?

Alexis J wrote:
If the fight is between Catholicism and Protestantism that battle will rage endlessly but is largely a waste of time unless the core metaphysics are defined. The metaphysics are however intangible (invisible if you will) and unknowable through mechanical means and science. The only way to “know” is by direct experience and this involves attempting a different methodology (of knowing). But almost no one (on this forum at least) has confidence in such declarations about “other ways of knowing” and most regard such as illusory or as related to mental derangement.

The reconciliation between the Protestants and Catholics is not a theological triumph of unity, but could be seen as a "fall of Protestantism" and a surrender to Rome.
The Vatican II allowed Protestant churches to retain their names and confessions, but required them to accept the ultimate supremacy of the Pope. Protestant leaders are abandoning the historic "Sola Scriptura: principle for a more pluralistic approach.

In the Vedas -- and note that there is certainly a correspondence in Christianity since, technically, Jesus Christ is understood to be an Avatar of "Vishnu", i.e. of that aspect of God that provides salvific knowledge to man -- it is proposed and noted that "God-consciousness" is the beginning of all positive growth in man and humankind. You would explain and note this by reference to the Prophets and the idea of Revelation. There is a corresponding idea in the Vedas but, in my view in the Vedas there are far wider and deeper and more detailed metaphysical explanations.

Good Heavens, Alexis Jacobi, was Jesus a Hindu Avatar? Replacing the biblical Jesus who is the unique and only begotten Son of God with a concept of Jesus as one of many avatars diminishes his divinity and is designed to lead people away from true biblical doctrines.

Frankly speaking, Protestantism and Catholicism become irrelevant when metaphysical principles are defined and understood. In any case, their millennial conflict has more or less evaporated for me in any case.

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Mon Feb 16, 2026 2:25 am

IC wrote:Say why you are convinced we should pay attention to the Vedas, if that's your base metaphysic.

In order to earn the privilege of asking questions...

This is a philosophy forum. We all, automatically, have the right to ask questions.

And I've been asking one you can't answer, it seems. So perhaps we all have the answer anyway.

reasonvemotion wrote: ↑Mon Feb 16, 2026 2:32 am Good Heavens, Alexis Jacobi, was Jesus a Hindu Avatar? Replacing the biblical Jesus who is the unique and only begotten Son of God with a concept of Jesus as one of many avatars diminishes his divinity and is designed to lead people away from true biblical doctrines.

You missed the point: the notion of both “Avatar” and “Vishnu” transcend both Christianity and Hinduism. Focus conceptually and it will become clearer.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Feb 16, 2026 3:44 am We all, automatically, have the right to ask questions.

You however, in respect to me, must earn the right. Show respect, earn respect.

reasonvemotion wrote: ↑Mon Feb 16, 2026 2:32 am Replacing the biblical Jesus who is the unique and only begotten Son of God with a concept of Jesus as one of many avatars diminishes his divinity and is designed to lead people away from true biblical doctrines.

Again I think you missed a larger point. It will be hard, this I admit, but see that Jesus is “one of many avatars” and still, despite that or anything, hold to and live out of defined metaphysical principles. Actually: go further with them and into them.

And help Immanuel Can, for God’s sake!

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Feb 16, 2026 3:44 am

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Mon Feb 16, 2026 2:25 am

IC wrote:Say why you are convinced we should pay attention to the Vedas, if that's your base metaphysic.

In order to earn the privilege of asking questions...

This is a philosophy forum. We all, automatically, have the right to ask questions.

And I've been asking one you can't answer, it seems. So perhaps we all have the answer anyway.

How is it that you go on, year after dreary year, preaching with no effect and not one win or conversion? Hmmm?

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Mon Feb 16, 2026 3:47 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Feb 16, 2026 3:44 am We all, automatically, have the right to ask questions.

You however, in respect to me, must earn the right. Show respect, earn respect.

I'm giving you the respect of taking your view seriously enough to engage it, and to ask the right question; which is exactly what we're here for. It that isn't enough respect to make you happy, I'll just learn to live with you being unhappy.

But the silence on the question and the excuses to avoid answering it are more eloquent than anything you could say, actually. I think I have the answer I need.

Go for it Alexis - do answer his question! We are all agog.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Feb 16, 2026 4:10 am I'm giving you the respect of taking your view seriously enough to engage it, and to ask the right question; which is exactly what we're here for. It that isn't enough respect to make you happy, I'll just learn to live with you being unhappy.

But the silence on the question and the excuses to avoid answering it are more eloquent than anything you could say, actually. I think I have the answer I need.

Immanuel! For God's sake man! You had the answer even before you got started. This is one aspect of the point I have made here: You operate within a closed system and you have no means, at all, to expand it. All the ideas, or the alternative perspectives I have suggested, are in your system by definition erroneous. You cannot give any assent because that might lead to instability of your mental system.

What you do, and what has gone on here so far, is a classic forum game. You MUST realize this!