Category Archives: Philosophy

by - 1 Comment

Guido von List – some ideas.

Today, in commemoration of Guido von list’s transition 105 years ago, let’s delve into a few ideas of Guido von List when he introduced his version of the Aryo Germanic religion. He was a thinker who had some interesting ideas, besides describing the runes, about the world and our place in it. 


Listen up! The first thing Guido stressed was the power of words. Language, he said, is like a treasure chest that holds onto traditions for future generations. It’s also connected to the natural world around us.

Now, Guido also noticed something interesting about religion. Sometimes, there are teachings everyone knows (like stories about gods and goddesses), and sometimes there are hidden teachings, meant for a smaller group. It’s kind of like having a secret handshake – only those “in the know” understand it.

Here’s another cool idea Guido had: imagine everything in the universe, from tiny rocks to giant stars, is all connected. It’s like a giant web, and everything has its place. He even believed that spirit and matter, the things we can’t touch and the things we can, are two sides of the same coin.

Guido also thought it was important for everyone to explore their own spirituality. He called this “Wihinei.” It’s like finding your own truth, not just following what everyone else tells you. By learning and questioning, you develop your own beliefs and become a stronger person.

Now, buckle up, because Guido had some ideas about what happens after we die. He believed in a cycle of rebirth, where our souls come from a source (like a giant cosmic lake he called the “Ur”) and return to it after living many lives. It’s kind of like a journey with many chapters.

And guess what? The universe, according to Guido, follows a set of rules, kind of like a cosmic recipe. One of these rules is called the “Law of Homogeneity.” It basically means there’s a pattern to everything, from the tiniest atom to the biggest galaxy. Pretty neat, huh?

Finally, Guido believed that something divine, a spark of the greater whole, lives inside each of us. That means every single person has something special, something that connects them to everything else in the universe. Pretty cool, right?

Remember,  these are just some of Guido von List’s ideas. There’s a lot more to learn about him, but this is a good starting point. We do not have to take his words blindly as truth, but he certainly gives us much to contemplate and consider as we develop our own philosophy of the world and our place in it. 

Why don’t you comment about your ideas of the world and our place in it. Let’s remain open minded and supportive of each other’s ideas and philosophies.

by

A special gift to the world.

What is my special gift to the world?

We are so often told not to be proud, not to boast etc. that we reduce our own image of what we have to offer to the world. We down play our contributions so that we do not look too arrogant. Yes I am always reminded that humility means the be yourself, no more and no less.  We have to acknowledge what our talents are and what makes us unique. In a world of 7.6 billion people uniqueness in any talent can be challenged. There seem to be always somebody better so we have to seek impecability and say in which gift to we give the best of what we are able to give. Even if our special gift is average in a broader context but special in terms of our own ability we need to strive towards impecability.

I have alwasy maintained that my biggest contribution is synergy. The ability to bring opposing views together or to find out how two seemingly unrelated topics have a connection. On a practical level it means that I am exceptionally good within meetings for example to strip the frivoulous from the essential and bring the discussion to a clear conjecture. Where other people get confused in a plethora of opinions I have an ability to sift out the key principles and often to reconcile even seemingly opposing viewpoints. It makes me a good peacemaker. With that ability my Stoicism gives me the equanimity required to remain consistent even when emotions flair up uncontrollably.  Being able to integrate and unite things often pushes me into leadership positions where I can guide people into considering new viewpoints and challenge their own viewpoints. I do that with a measure of consistency and determination. My ability to persist, to remain passionate is often the factors that take my gift of synergy to a nest level. When the two combines then the outcome is momentum advancing continuious progressive innovation and transformation.

That is not just a summary of my gift but it also directs my mission in life.  Momentum implies the ability to generate the thought, actions and support and slowly building it up until the process continuous without my assistance. Advancing means it is something that strives ever towards something better, making a better contribution. Progressive means a forward and expansive movement towards an ideal a dream and or a vision for what is possible. Innovation implies new thinking. I often contribute new ideas and passion into situations that offers a new way of thinking about things. Transformation means change. I drive change and make change happen. There is an old addage: “I do not create rumours but I am the roumour” that has a ring of truth to it.

My special gift is not just new ideas nor even inpiring ideas but the tenacity to generate the energy and collective will to realise those ideas.

by - 1 Comment

Science vs Experience

 Atheists in the name of science often claim that the only facts we can rely on are those proven by science as hard core fact. Indeed science does have some bold claims to made where observation is consistently the same given the same circumstances. This repetitiveness allows science to deduct some reliable laws that is predictable and testable. When the predicted behaviour does not take place the scientist will look at depth into the anomaly to try and understand what violated the laws that was suppose to take place. Anything that does not submit to this scrutiny is categorised as pseudoscience and discarded at best with suspicion.

 By all means the rigidity and constancy of true science must be regarded with great respect because science has lead human beings out of the dark ages to real insight in the universe and its natural laws. However, it will be a grave mistake to put science on a pedestal where it is untouchable and above reproach by other sciences. Science is not above other sciences to the degree that its reasoning is faultless. Science can describe a result and even predict an outcome but science always make a deduction as to the reason why a certain outcome is obtained. That deduction is a thought process and can be wrong. The reliability and predictability of an outcome under given circumstances does not imply the reasons for the outcome is correct. The reasoning might be sound but cannot claim to be irrefutable. If anybody showed this to be incorrect then it is science itself that has time and time again refuted an explanation by its own scientific processes. The end result is an ever increased refinement of the conclusions drawn and better hypothesis of explanation put forward for consideration.

 The mistake so often made, by those who looked dogmatically at science, is to shun anything that is not the product of scientific certainty. Other sciences relies on trends and statistics to make broad statements of truth that can be tested within a margin of error. A comment that 90% people in South Africa love to eat pork can be tested through surveys and it can be confirmed if similar results of the same order is found. Science has taken a step to accept and even use such methods in other areas like social sciences to make deductions.

 However there is a category that science is correctly sceptical over. This is the space of personal experience where data is not easily repeatable.  When we have to rely on anecdotal evidence then we are in a grey field where it is difficult to interpret results. Anecdotal evidence are subjective filters that are inherent to the thought processes of humans. One person will perceive God as an intelligent human like entity with whom he has an intimate and personal relationship while another will perceive God as pervasive throughout the universe as an intelligent and abstract first cause.  Both can claim their right to accuracy with full confidence of relying on their own experience. Science looks at this unpredictability and the often conflicting outcomes and rejects personal experience in totality as a basis for any conclusion.

 Yet, it will be a grave misjudgement to simply ignore all experiences that are of a personal nature because a large part of our human perception of existence is embedded in this experience of subjective filtering. Given the shared experience people witness of, it seems that the filters are not by default wrong but simply that they give different interpretation to the similar experiences. If anything it is important that humanity explore with deep concentration these experiences and the filters we use to interpret those experiences because they are as valid input as the observation of a natural law playing itself in nature.

 I claim therefore that science has a serious blind spot if science ignores anecdotal evidence completely.  Yes, it must be looked at with intense questioning mind but also with an acute curiosity. Our experiences of a world not connected to a material world and its laws, which we call the spiritual world, deserve to be acknowledged even if it is with caution.  A pure scientific focus on the material world denies life, love and values for none is purely material. Each individual must be encourage to employ tools and techniques to explore their inner world and to test conclusions, rather than be dogmatically told to take certain interpretation by blind faith. Each individual can by right claim a view on the truth and develop an inner process of refining that personal truth without making it a ideology that all must abide with.

 

by - 0 comments

Courage: Taking on the battle

The clock struck midnight…its time for a fundamental shift in my life. I do not know how it will play out nor how I will traverse the period of challenge that lies ahead. I am entering a period of deep self analysis, facing my own weaknesses where my own karma is coming back to haunt me. The forces coming down on me is outside of my current control and will be severe but hopefully also cleansing. It is as if the dark forces  are gathering for the battle. I can fight issues one by one but I cannot fight them all when they happen all at once or in the same time frame. Defeat will be humiliating and victory is a slim possibility.

Paulo Coelo summarise it beautifully in the book: “The Devil and Miss Prym”: “When we least expect it, life sets us a challenge to test our courage and willingness to change; at such a moment, ther is no point in pretending that nothing has happened or in saying that we ar not yet ready. The challenge will not wait. Life does not look back. A week is more than enough time for us to decide whether or not to accept our destiny. ”

It is in these circumstances that I ask myself again and again how I should behave. What does it mean to have the courage? The definition of  courage is: the quality of mind or spirit that enables a person to face difficulty, danger, pain. The internet is abundant about the topic of courage. I like the one of Maya Angelou that reads “Courage is the most important of all the virtues because without courage, you can’t practice any other virtue consistently”. I like this definition because it shows you haw the virtues are interrelated and where each virtue if seen on its own seems to be the most important of the virtues.

Courage does not shrink back, but rather faces the situation head on. Proverbally taking the bull by the horns. There is no procrastination when it comes to courage. Courage accesses the odds, make up a battle plan and then go into the fight fully without hesitation. Courage accepts the outcome of the battle whether it is victory or failure. The odds no longe matter but the focus remains singularly on victory and accepts defeat only when there is no more options.

Courage enables us to maintain our equanimity and friendliness to those around us. When we are courageous we do not allow our issues to spill over into the lives of those around us. We remain the pillar that other can lean on irrespective how weak we feel. Courage is not being frozen my circumstances but to maintain the agility and awareness to find a way forward.

Maybe I should end of this contemplation on courage with a quote from Napoleon Bonaparte: “Courage isn’t having the strength to go on – it is going on when you don’t have the strength”

by - 0 comments

Facing disasters

We all face challenges at some stage that seems to like disasters, as a matter of fact some are indeed disasters that will lead to a loss of some kind for us in life. This is part of normal life. Stoic philosophy says it is external and and externals should not determine our level of happiness. It is our perception on these externals that will change how we experience these significant life events.

I am currently experiencing it on both a macro and micro level. The micro level relates to my own finances where I am struggling to make ends meet while succeeding in my duty to assist my children with their studies. The macro level relates to me living in a metropolitan city that is preparing to run out of water. Both are equally eminent and will bring a level of discomfort and challenge along with it. In magnitude of course the macro issue is far greater since it will affect many people and can lead to the actual death of many people. Without water there is no life.

Within these periods of times I reallise more than ever the value of philosophy. To have an approach that you can follow with confidence. I cannot avoid the problems or issues but I do have a choice how to deal with the situation. It calls for courage, integrity and creativity. These types of unavoidable disasters challenge our core philosophical concepts and drives us to work from divine creative inspiration.  We need to find new solutions and make fundamental shifts in our way of life.

Contemplating this situation it reminds me of the image of the Tower card in the Tarot. Sometimes the breakdown of our existing way of living, as painful as it is, will lead to new life and living patternd. For the mystic it is never to get dismayed but to keep living with hope to keep contemplating on solutions. The Stoic on the other hand accepts fate even if it threaten to shorten life. For the Stoic the aim remain ever to live with virtuous integrity remaining in tact.