critique (5)

12934446255?profile=RESIZE_710x

Contemplative educator, Dr. Parker J. Palmer (1939-  ) internationally famous and award-winning author/teacher/mentor of alternative and authentic education, has never impressed me with his understanding and teaching(s) on fear management/education. If anyone ought to be interested in "fearlessness" and the emancipation of teachers and school systems and parenting, it would be this guide. But, I find his work often brilliant and wise, and then quite dull and ignore-ant or reductionistic when it comes to the topic of "fear." I have long been one to embrace his work (like, "The Courage to Teach" in 1998, when he critically named the "culture of fear" in Education, especially in higher education at that time when no one else had done so from within the education system)--see his Chapter 2 in that book. But, then I tried reaching out to him several times to explore fear more deeply and to analyze what "culture of fear" means to education as a meta-context, and I did also challenge a graduate adult ed. student who loved PJP as well, and I have challenged other educators who idolize this man and his work. Yes, he has a large following of acolytes. But none of them are interested, or they are intimidated by my critiques and offerings. This has been so disappointing and tells me a lot about what kind of consciousness and values these educators have, of which I sense are quite fear-based themselves. But that is another topic for another blog. [note: Some yrs. ago, I have written about Palmer & Wilber in another blogpost here]

My larger contextual critique of Parker, characteristic of people who are generally contemplatives, meditators, 'spiritual-types' and 'mindfulness' advocates is: their thinking is boring and unoriginal--and, that won't do sufficiently for a very complex/novel world of change and adaptation that our primate species is going through. 

In this blog I merely want to point to a recent quote I found from PJ Parker (2004) where again, I am so disappointed in where his discourse goes with fear--it is so incomplete and quite distortive because it has no real theory to it. He wrote,

"I follow the thread of true self faithfully for a while. Then I lose it and find myself back in the dark, where fear drives me to search for the thread once again. That pattern, as far as I can tell, is inherent in the human condition. Yet its grip on my life has weakened as I have explored it in circles of trust. Today, I lose the thread less often" (p. 90). 

Okay, fine, this sounds like basic recovery practice, name it, claim it, deal with it face-to-face, kind of fear management (or just like one does this kind of work when working with an addiction). But you can read his entire 2004 book, for example, and there is no further insights he has into fear. He doesn't explore it but prefers trust, love and courage and soul and concepts like that. He has no notion of the praxis of fearlessness or fear praxis, as I have articulated. And he never cites my work on this all. He is off on his own tangent and is in the above quote telling people (a lot of people) that basically fear is his motivator to get back on trust/faith/love path, etc. He doesn't define fear for us or theorize it in complicated ways, or speak about the "culture of fear" and politics of fear and how getting back on track/trust isn't just an individualized therapia from his circles of (psychological) trust-making and sharing. I find this all too pithy and under-theorized and not up on the latest knowledges or holistic approach to the study of fear (e.g., like critical developmental fearology as I offer). It also is not a good sign that fear is the best motivator either. That's pretty much what he concludes on this page after all his life experience and work. Hmmm... something missing there! 

Of course, PJ Parker has lots of guidance to offer those interested in transformation, but I am merely saying, it lacks in some critical areas--and, thus we have to think carefully about what transformation even means in the meta-context of a culture of fear today. Parker admited that context but I find he never kept up the research into the implications of it--and, it's the latter that has been my speciality. [Note: added later Sept. 21/24-- after reading some of Palmer (2004) "A Hidden Wholeness" there was quite a breakthrough in my configuration and analysis. It occurred that Palmer was not doing transformative learning (transformation was not his focus ever)--rather, he was doing restorative learning, within and through an eccleasiatical (Quaker-Christian) lens of wholeness and healing. His focus is thus such of an important type of learning, "in solitude together" in addressing the "pathology of the divided life" (i.e., "role" vs. "soul") and so on... my earlier comment above in bold therefore was me looking for something good in a transformative context but now I see that's not really Palmer's gift. His gift is restorative learning (processes, like the "circle of trust"). We need both restorative and transformative learning as Elizabeth Lange has argued in her good research and article: Restorative & Transformative Lange.pdf. ]

 

 

 

Read more…

12403800855?profile=RESIZE_710x

 

Fearologist, Dr. R. Michael Fisher, gives a talk on "Gut Mind & Fear (Primal) Intelligence, where he talks about his approach to "spiritual education" (via path of fearlessness) as quite different than most. He shares a story of his early life encounter in the wilderness with a 'grizzly bear'--a story with a teaching from Fear. Go to: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3z9Rvz8QrBY

 

Read more…
12237175074?profile=RESIZE_400x
by Jun-ichi-Suzki, Hokkaido, Japan
 
Desh Subba is a Nepali-born writer and poet. His self-published book ①"Philosophy of Fearism" depicts fear as a major part of human life. According to him, life is guided and controlled by fear. And we humans are in the age of "FEARMORPHOSIS," which is a combination of "Sisyphus," "Metamorphosis," and "No Exit," and we are making the argument that in society and life various Sisyphuses are pushing a rock. Here again, human is Fear Sisyphus being watched by Panopticons.
②And he keeps writing that "Hell is other people concept is wrong because Hell is himself. Sartre contradicts himself, we can see contradiction between Existence Precedes Essence and Hell is other people."
 
Sartre's literary works that are relevant here include "The Wall'' which depicts the delusion of life as seen from the perspective of a person who is placed in a "death-limit situation'', "No Exit'' which depicts the hell of others, and "The Wall''. In "The Dead Without a Grave," he depicts a person dying after all attempts at justification are invalidated, and expresses the "vomiting nature" of existence through "vomiting."
 
Verification:
①"Philosophy of Fearism" depicts fear as a major part of human life. According to him, life is guided and controlled by fear.
 
This is the first time I've heard the phrase "philosophy of fear." I think this theory was built with a focus on the human "consciousness of fear." This "consciousness" is suitable for things that are "feared." In this case, the "fear" that exists in the outside world is being watched by Panopticons and Metamorphosis, right?
 
First, in existential philosophy, humans are "free''. "Consciousness" is "free" even if circumstances prevent it from being "free." It is impossible for our human "consciousness" to always be "fearful." The "consciousness'' of "fear'' exists as an "object'' of human consciousness in contrast to the "situation'' or "existence within the situation." "Fear'' does not "exist'' in "consciousness.'' The "consciousness of fear'' as a "concept'' "exists'' within humans, and through the act of manifesting it, we create an "image'' of it in the outside world, whether it be in the space in front of us through our eyes or outside the window even behind the eyelids for instance.
 
The fact that humans are free also means that they are trying to transcend their destiny and categories, which "depicts fear as a major part of human life. According to him, life is guided and controlled by fear."
As a matter of fact and as my experience, I do not live my life depending on something called "fear."
In my opinion, the philosophy of fear has its meaning in the real world of North Korea, where Kim Jong Il's dictatorship is in place. There, people are stripped of their humanity and their freedom of action and speech is severely restricted. It is precisely under such circumstances that resistance and revolutionary movements are necessary. I think we need "action'' to overcome the "philosophy of fear'' rather than just analysis. If a talented literary figure in North Korea were to write a literary novel based on the "philosophy of fear," they might be able to create a good work.
Additionally, the same situation applies to those who have been deprived of their freedom due to the killings and oppression of the people in the Tibetan Autonomous Region under China's effective rule.
 
Human beings always use their imagination in their daily lives. Imagination is also "consciousness." I previously talked about the difference between "self-deception" and "lies" and how humans use these two in their lives. And the important thing is that we spend 1/3 of our lives sleeping. This means that sleep resets your daily life. You could call it "oblivion." Also, I think you can understand the importance of dreaming because here again we use the "consciousness'' of "imagination.''
②"Hell is other people concept is wrong because Hell is himself. Sartre contradicts himself, we can see contradiction between Existence Precedes Essence and Hell is other people."
 
Well, let me disproof about "Hell is other people concept is wrong." 
 
Just like myself, the "others" is also a "self-existence''. The "others'' is also an "existence'' whose "existence precedes essence.'' Sartre devotes one of his three books, "Being and Nothingness,'' to "exploring this "existence of the others'' .This is because the world is an aggregation of these "self-existence'', and elucidating the meaning of this human relationship is a feat that traditional "realists'' could not accomplish.
And the meaning of "Hell is other people'' is "Humans always judge their own worth, their existence, and the way their lives should be based on the eyes of others. Hell is the expression of the fact that you cannot escape forever from the gaze and the feeling of being measured by others."
There are such things as "Hell" that has become a reality and "Hell as a concept", so taking these into consideration, if I change the expression, "Hell is also other people'' .
In addition, in Christianity, there is also "Purgatory".
 
Well, in conclusion, Sartre's ontology is not contradictory. Thank you for reading through my attempt to defend Sartre's critique of existential philosophy.
 
[NB: This article is taken from Jean-Paul Sartre Facebook Group. With the permission of Jun-ichi-Suzuki it is re-published.]
 
 
Read more…

Meditation: Be Fearful and Fearless

10778369464?profile=RESIZE_584x

A Talk By R. M. Fisher, @ Meditative Inquiry Conference, Aug. 18, 2022 

The link here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2H8yByGFYw&list=PLfVjDB_dQhEomgiYYmBJKj1nvD1oGBwaf&index=14

gives access to a Talk I did on the Fearlessness Worldview and its critique of Meditative Inquiry as is being promoted by several people, especially in E. Canada and the field of Education. This is part of a movement of spiritual education and its branches of holistic education, transpersonal education, contemplative education, mindfulness education, peace education, love education, etc. I critique the bias of perspective of all these movements that like to focus and collectivize their "corrective" for the world around virtues signalling and aims of hope. The Fearlessness Worldview, a liberation praxis itself and education process, takes another route, one that is arguably less fear-based, more integral-holistic and wiser than the fault of running after the next fix of 'escape' from fear and suffering and a world so enmeshed in the making of its own crises--at every level and especially at the level of the institutions that fall within the Dominant Worldview and its self-deception and corruption. 

After a brief meditation I offer at the beginning (photo above), I am 2nd to speak on the panel and I start with critical commentary about the problems I see in the book "Meditative Inquiry" based on the conference leader's work. IF you only want to see my teachings go to 25:38 on the video for a 20 min. rather improvisational lecture. And go to 1:10:45 for picking up on comments (Q and A) at the end of the panel session, in which you will hear one philosophy professor from India makes comments on my talk and concludes fervently "we need to be fearful and fearless" --then, I come on and comment on his comment and take the discussion further based on a question someone asked in the panel "define fearlessness." Of course, of which I didn't in a nice clean linear way! I give some reasons for why that is so, and the problem of my topic and this question in the context of having one or two minutes at most to engage it. I really find these rushed-time conference presentations as a format a horrid way to actually do serious scholarly work or dialogue. Oh, well... take this for what it's worth.... 

 

Of course, in only a 20 min. talk on a panel, it is near impossible to set up my arguments for a Fearlessness Worldview and 

 

Read more…

Continuing on with the series of five technical papers on ecocriticism, I am pleased to offer this 2nd one: "Ecocriticism, Ecophobia and the Culture of Fear: Autobiographical Reflections" (Technical Paper 67). 

R. Michael Fisher

Technical Paper No. 67

 

Abstract – This second of five Technical Papers on ecocriticism, and in particular with a critical focus on discourse(s) on ecophobia (e.g., Estok’s “Hypothesis of Ecophobia”), is intended to assist the author and reader to integrate the basics from the postmodern field of ecocriticism. The author utilizes a brief autobiographical and historical ‘coming out’ as an early ecocritic and eventual academic critic of the larger phenomenon of the “culture of fear” as central to the author’s project (since 1989). He contends that despite not having accessed the ecocriticism scholarship over the past three decades or so, he has been attracted ‘naturally’ (from his late teens) to critiquing the very environmental and ecological (‘green’) movements he so loved. Though, mostly, he critiqued the mainstream society and media in how it depicted these movements. Within this autobiographical narrative the author brings in several theoretical guides (e.g., primary influence of the integral philosopher Ken Wilber) and shares his own theorizing on the “culture of fear” (and its critics), and ‘Fear’ Studies.   

 

Read more…