Monday, January 8, 2024
Sunday, January 7, 2024
珍惜噪音 (Cherish the noise) （negativity vs vitality)
你要理解，根莖的聯結，就是發出噪音，
你要理解，定於習一尊，就是闇啞噪音，
（比如說，文化大革命，除了生吃活人，就是強姦輪姦，把林昭張志新，姦到沒有正常的共匪，有胃口再姦（當然不正常的共匪，可以邊吐邊姦），那時再把，張志新的喉嚨割斷，讓她被槍斃的時候，不能發聲，高喊反共口號）
意思是說，噪音會預約來世，帶你去想像不到的地方，
那個地方，叫做「自由」，
意思是說，噪音就是生命，
意思是說，negativity 就是闇啞噪音，vitality 就是發出噪音，
Noise in Communication System
Noise in the nervous system
Noise (electronics)
How does noise affect control systems?
Saturday, January 6, 2024
1130803 - 1130824 (存在治療課程)
課程簡介：
存在治療，是一個一百多年來，與精神分析並行的，心理治療的小傳統。
存在治療，源自人文學，與人文學交涉，自然甚深。其沿革如下：
(一) Daseinsanalysis (Ludwig Binswanger, Medard Boss, Martin Heidegger)
(二) Logotherapy (Viktor Frankl, Alfried Längle)
(三) 英國存在治療學派 (Society of Existential Analysis, The legacy of R. D. Laing, Hans Cohn, Ernesto Spinelli, Emmy van Deurzen, Mick Cooper, Manu Bazzano)
(四) 美國人本經驗學派 (Rollo May, Erik Craig, Kirk Schneider)
(五) 中國直面治療 (王學富)
這個課程，義在鋪陳上述，進而說明，進一步的發展，可能性何在。
(一) 來到混沌的邊緣
既已途經，自體的心理學 (Psychology of the self)，我遂知道，我對存在，以至存在治療的理解，復來到「混沌的邊緣」(the edge of chaos)。
意思是說，這是「不像蘋果的」蘋果，「不像存在治療的」存在治療。
換句話說，我想要說的，是「不正常的」存在治療。
(二) 什麼是「正常的」存在治療？
2.1
正常的存在治療，「哲學文學方面」，通常會從十九世紀中葉，齊克果 (1813-1855)，尼采 (1844-1900)，杜斯妥也夫斯基 (1821-1881) 講起，然後廿世紀初葉，胡塞爾 (1859-1938)，海德格 (1889-1976) 進場，廿世紀中葉，沙特 (1905-1980)，卡謬 (1913-1960) 接續，劇場方面，則有貝克特 (1906-1989)，尤涅斯科 (1909-1994)，和無器官身體 (BwO) 的嘶喊 (Antonin Artaud, 1896-1948)。
上述族譜，往往遺忘了兩個前輩，Lev Shestov (1866-1938)，Benjamin Fondane (1898-1944)，你要理解，Fondane 受 Shestov 影響甚深，卡謬則受 Fondane 啟發甚深。
但是存在主義的最大的問題是，存在不只是發生在，一九四零年代的巴黎左岸。
意思是說，你我每一個人，都必須重新改寫，屬於我們自己的時空的存在主義。
比如說，
The Age of Absurdity: Why Modern Life makes it Hard to be Happy, by Michael Foley, Simon & Schuster, 2010
Damaged Life: The Crisis of the Modern Psyche, by Tod Sloan, Routledge, 1995
Wasted Lives: Modernity and Its Outcasts, by Zygmunt Bauman, Polity, 2003
Collateral Damage: Social Inequalities in a Global Age, by Zygmunt Bauman, Polity, 2011
Minima Moralia: Reflections from Damaged Life, by Theodor Adorno, 1951 (written 1944-1949, German edition published in 1951)
沙河悲歌，七等生，1976 (1939-2020)
龍天樓，王文興，1967 (1939-2023)
2.2
正常的存在治療，從「心理治療方面」說起，光景如何？
2.2.1
正常的存在治療，「心理治療方面」，通常會從被遺忘的前行者 Ludwig Binswanger (1881-1966) 講起。
Binswanger 一生，與佛洛伊德，過從甚密，想法雖有異，但並未決裂，他是第一個用現象學讀精神分析的作者。
2.2.2
但是，海德格沒有感謝 Binswanger 採其哲學，提出 Daseinsanalyze 的努力。
二戰後，海德格藉 Zollikon Seminars (1959-1969)，加持 Medard Boss (1903-1990)，助其提出 Daseinsanalysis。
Cf. Marshall, J. M. (1989). Heidegger as depicted by Binswanger and Boss. Theoretical & Philosophical Psychology, 9(2), 37–43.
Daseinsanalysis 與精神分析的對話，迄今未歇。
2.2.3
其次，Viktor Frankl (1905-1997)，二戰前即已提出 Logotherapy。二戰期間，Frankl 倖存人間煉獄，Auschwitz 集中營，此說遂等同，經歷極端苦難者之讓人動容俯首的見證。
近年，Frankl 的學生 Alfried Längle (b 1951) 順著 Logotherapy，復提出 Existential Analysis。
2.2.4
其次，Ronald David Laing (1927-1989)，離經叛道，桀傲不馴，影響了六零年代迄今，好幾個世代的治療者。
其中影響之一，就是 Emmy van Deurzen (b 1951)，以至其與 Hans W. Cohn，Ernesto Spinelli 等人，於 1988 成立英國存在分析學會 (Society of Existential Analysis) 。
SEA，等同存在治療，終於有其棲息之所。
SEA 後起之秀，包括 Mick Cooper，Manu Bazzano。
2.2.5
其次，美國的人本經驗治療 (humanistic experiential therapy)，亦屬存在治療。
這個發展，與六零年代人本心理學之興起有關。
重要作者包括，Rollo May (1909-1994), Erik Craig，Kirk Schneider。
2.2.6
其次，中國南京的王學富，提出直面治療。
這是不忘魯迅的吶喊，遂在中共惡政治下的中國，為存在留下生機。
(三) 什麼是「不正常的」存在治療？
Manu Bazzano 提出的 counter-tradition，就是不正常的存在治療的例子。
意思是說，我們每個人，都有義務，提出屬於自己的，「不正常的」存在治療。
意思是說，唯其不正常，方對得住，存在二字，方堪得起，存在治療。
策略之一，就是繼續 unpack，迄今猶被忽略的作者，不管那是人文學，還是社會科學，甚至量子力學 (a la Karen Barad, Agential Realism)。
策略之二，就是讓自己的神經裸露，讓時代的經驗穿過自己，再看自己還能剩下什麼殘骸。
意思是說，「不正常的」存在治療，鬼火燐燐，誕生在遍地殘骸的野塚。
(四) Negativity vs Vitality
4.1
Benjamin Fondane 寧可赴死，走進納粹的毒氣室，而「不願」棄其家人而不顧。
天地遊魂，魂在野塚，面對的當然是，禁錮生命，迫害生命的系統。
新左喜歡批判資本主義，這點我沒有意見；但是新左開的藥方，往往是共產主義的反烏托邦 (dystopia)，這點我無法沒有意見。簡單講，這些義正詞嚴的新左，沒有一個，在中共文革，被生吃活人，在中共治下，被活摘器官。他們根本不知道，共匪暴政，是如何不可思議的邪惡。
不正常的存在治療，不忍屈從暴政，與之戀屍共舞，而「願」禮讚，在死亡威脅下，在暴政狹縫中，「頑強的壓不扁的生命」。
意思是說，「不正常的」存在治療，鬼火燐燐，但是，vitality > negativity，「生大於死」。
4.2
我先前說過，廿一世紀，我們已預見後人類的世界，那個世界，就是自體的心理學的最後一章。
最後一章的意思，就是眾生物種滅絕，生命不須存在，不復存在，不能存在。
我無法同意，Lovelock (2019) 所說，那個人工智能主宰一切的世界，是宇宙意識(cosmic consciousness) 的演化的必然，人類不應自私，為了自保，而阻擋那個世界的到來。
Cf Novacene: The Coming Age of Hyperintelligence, by James Lovelock, Allen Lane, 2019
曾提出地球是 Gaia 的生態系統的 James Lovelock，晚年竟棄 Gaia 和眾生而不顧，讓我感慨。
生大於死，vitality > negativity。
心如工畫師，能造種種陰。
心如工畫師，能造後人類。
我希望 (hope)，人類的覺醒和謙卑，還來得及。
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1D94v1DuTZ8to5XIswGCaQ8viIWw5hwrm?usp=sharing
Binswanger, Daseinsanalyse and the Issue of the Unconscious: An Historical Reconstruction as a Preliminary Step for a Rethinking of Daseinsanalytic Psychotherapy (Roberto Vitelli, 2018)
Binswanger, Daseinsanalyse and the Issue of the Unconscious: An Historical Reconstruction as a Preliminary Step for a Rethinking of Daseinsanalytic Psychotherapy
Roberto Vitelli
Journal of Phenomenological Psychology 49 (1):1-42 (2018)
'The poetry of psychiatry’: existential analysis and the politics of psychopathology in Franco’s Spain (2023)
Certain Antidepressants May Increase Risk of Impulse Control Disorder in Parkinson’s Patients
Friday, January 5, 2024
一周後 (福德身心診所)
van life metaphysics
包子為其父修超級陵墓，佔地兩千七百萬平方公里，意思是說，整個中國就是陵墓，裡面有吃有喝有嫖有賭，保證讓膜拜的中國人民精盡人亡，
包子派蔡奇去找劉源，意思是說，要劉源開價，不要造反，你要理解，每個趙家人，都有價碼，
1130106 (2024 道埕年會：敘說中的自我與他者) (回應)
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Mu91Wg72sXkYdYihle1dlK9Gyg3AWA9Z/view?usp=drive_link
Wednesday, January 3, 2024
「醫療機構電子病歷製作及管理辦法」修正案 (111-7-18) (福德身心診所)
17年來最大修法，電子病歷新法四大重點帶來根本性變革
Decolonizing Development: Implications for Theory and Practice (Daniel Jose Gaztambide, 2024-1-19)
With the rise of mother-infant observation, attachment research, and the relational turn, theories of development and dyadic co-regulation have become central to contemporary clinical theory and practice. Alongside the emergence of developmentally informed relational approaches is a "decolonial turn" calling for greater attention to the social, cultural, and political dimensions of psychoanalytic theory and practice. While decolonial perspectives in contemporary psychoanalysis have long drawn on relational theories, decolonial frameworks have yet to be integrated into theories of development. This presentation will use key examples from the literature to illustrate the limitations of developmental thinking, and draw on contemporary research and decolonial theory to distinguish between two neurocognitive models of relatedness—a dyadic model primarily oriented toward two-person, mutual regulation, and a triadic model oriented toward communal norms and systems of hierarchy. Given the literature's prioritizing of the former, a decolonial approach to development integrating the latter will be offered. By going beyond a two-person, dyadic model, this approach helps clarify the impact of the social surround on development, with implications for clinical practice.
Presentation by Daniel Gaztambide
van life metaphysics (1120103) (星期三)
Tuesday, January 2, 2024
Marrano (Spinoza)
(In medieval Spain) a Jew or Moor who had converted to Christianity, especially one who professed conversion in order to avoid persecution.
1130102 (星期二）
石破，意思是說，石之物性，必破，必然破，必須破，
意思是說，破，適得其所，有何不可，
明下午宣判，刑期至少五年，即刻發監，自此獄中書寫，以了餘生，
中豐路，右轉中正路，上六十二交流道，
咖啡包，可撐一月，
意思是說，不需搖頭，笑氣缺貨，
宋楚瑜，竟還活著，殊為可怪，
習近平，沒收支付寶，奪得十億中國人民，共二百萬億儲值，
家樂福，拖把，六片布，水晶皂，
Monday, January 1, 2024
Inferno (Desert Heat) (1999)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inferno_(1999_film)
https://youtu.be/pwRSx6H3euE?si=_0cYNlW26r8OKGpd
This was the last film directed by Avildsen before his death in 2017. (1935-2017)
Yirmiyahu Yovel (1935-2018)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yirmiyahu_Yovel
Publications
Yirmiyahu Yovel's published numerous scholarly articles and several books, among them Kant and the Problem of History (Princeton 1980,86) Spinoza and Other Heretics (Princeton 1989), Dark Riddle: Hegel, Nietzsche and the Jews (Polity 1996) and The Other Within: The Marranos (Princeton 2013). He translated into Hebrew two major philosophical classics (Spinoza's Ethics and Kant's Critique of Pure Reason) with systematic introductions, and edited several collective books, including a 5-volume encyclopedia of Jewish modern secular culture. Yovel's credits as journalist include dozens of press columns and 30 major TV programs.
Spinoza and other Heretics
Yovel's best-known book is Spinoza and other Heretics, (Princeton 1989), a diptych in two volumes that offers a new interpretation of the existential origins of Spinoza's intellectual revolution (Vol. I) and its developments in later thinkers of modernity (Vol. II). Spinoza appealed to Yovel primarily by his radical principle of immanence, which Yovel sees as paradigmatic of much of modern thought, and by his striking personal case. No modern thinker before Nietzsche has gone as far as Spinoza in shedding all historical religion and all horizons of transcendence. In wondering what had enabled Spinoza to tear himself so drastically from the Western theistic tradition, Yovel did not turn directly to the rational arguments that drove Spinoza, but looked first for the historico-existential situation that cleared the mental space for those arguments to emerge and take hold in the mind.[10]
The answer, Yovel suggested, is linked to the dualities and confused religious identity of the peculiar Jewish group from which Spinoza came, the so-called Marranos, who before arriving in Holland had lived for generations in Spain and Portugal as forced converts from Judaism, absorbing Christian symbols, mental patterns and ways of thinking. Former Jews who tried to remain Jewish in secret had only scant knowledge of Judaism, and what they knew they conceptualized in Christian terms; while others, having mixed the two religions, ended up neither Jews nor Christians, and looked to the affairs of this life and this world as a substitute to religious salvation in either Jesus or Moses. However, describing the events of Marranos responding to the miracle in the Convent of São Domingos in Lisbon on April 19, 1506 with statements such as "How can a piece of wood do miracles?", or "Put some water to it and it'll go out", Yovel states that these words "expressed the same rough Jewish common sense resisting the Catholic sense of mysterium and insisting on calling super-rational phenomena by their earthly names."[11] The Marrano experience, Yovel suggests, made it possible for several ex-Marranos to adopt the immanent and "secular" standpoint which Spinoza radicalized and gave it a powerful systematization.[12]
Volume One (The Marrano of Reason)[13] uses historical and literary materials to elicit a set of typical and recurring Marrano patterns (for example: life on two levels, overt and concealed; the use of equivocation and dual language; the search for an alternative way to salvation, replacing Jesus and Moses with philosophical reason, etc.) which in Spinoza are transposed from the context of religion to that of reason. From the other direction, key philosophical issues in Spinoza (language, politics and the multitude, the third kind of knowledge) are also, at the same time, shown to be responding to Marrano-like elements that further illuminate and contextualize them. Yovel insists that this contextualization is not reductive: Spinoza's ideas have an independent rational import that cannot be reduced to the historical circumstances that allowed them to arise.[14]
A heretic to all religions, Spinoza was banned by the rabbis but refused to convert to Christianity. By calling him "the first modern Jew", Yovel highlights his relevance to the Modern Jewish situation. His case - even more than his thought - anticipated most of the rival and contradicting solutions that were offered in later centuries to non-orthodox Jewish existence. Yet Spinoza himself neither advocated nor personally realized any of those options. He thus became, involuntarily, a founding father of almost all the forms of modern life in which he himself did not participate.[15]
Volume Two (The Adventures of Immanence)[16] uncovers the presence of Spinoza's revolution in some major turns of modern thought. Yovel distinguishes between naturalism and the broader concept of a "philosophy of immanence". The latter maintains that (a) immanent reality is all there is, the overall horizon of being; (b) it is also (through humans) the only valid source of moral and political norms; and (c) interiorizing this recognition is a precondition to whatever liberation or redemption humans can hope for. Yovel takes the reader into the latent and overt conversation with Spinoza in the work of Kant, Hegel, the left-Hegelians (Heine, Feuerbach, Hess), Marx, Nietzsche and Freud - all of whom shared a core philosophy of immanence but worked it out in rival ways, which also diverge from Spinoza's. This approach makes vividly present Spinoza's influence on modernity, including Jewish modernity. In the Epilogue, speaking for himself, Yovel argues for a critical philosophy of immanence to modify Spinoza's "dogmatic" one.[17]
The book was widely discussed and translated into French, German, Hebrew, Spanish, Portuguese, and Japanese.[18]
Can we say that Descartes’ dualism cleared the way for the later development of natural science ? (ChatGPT) (2024-1-1)
Yes, it can be argued that René Descartes' dualism, specifically his separation of mind and body, played a role in paving the way for the later development of natural science. Descartes, a 17th-century philosopher and mathematician, is often considered one of the founders of modern Western philosophy and science.
Descartes' dualism is most famously expressed in his work "Meditations on First Philosophy," where he distinguishes between the mind (res cogitans) and the body (res extensa). This separation allowed him to conceive of the physical world in a mechanistic manner, treating it as a complex system of matter governed by mathematical laws. The mind, according to Descartes, was non-material and governed by different principles.
The impact of Descartes' dualism on the development of natural science includes:
Mechanistic Worldview: Descartes' dualism laid the groundwork for a mechanistic understanding of the physical world. By conceiving the body as an extended, mechanical system, he provided a philosophical framework that aligned with the emerging mechanistic worldview in natural science. This worldview became particularly influential during the Scientific Revolution.
Mathematization of Nature: Descartes emphasized the importance of mathematics in understanding the natural world. His approach to physics involved describing natural phenomena in mathematical terms. This mathematical approach became a hallmark of modern science, as subsequent scientists, such as Galileo, Newton, and others, developed mathematical models to explain and predict the behavior of the physical universe.
Objectivity and Reductionism: Descartes' dualism contributed to the development of an objective and reductionist approach in science. By separating the subjective mind from the objective body, he paved the way for a scientific methodology that aimed at objectively studying the external world through observation, measurement, and experimentation, often reducing complex phenomena to simpler, mechanistic components.
While Descartes' dualism had significant implications for the early development of natural science, it's essential to note that later developments in philosophy and science have challenged and modified his ideas. The mind-body problem, raised by Descartes' dualism, continues to be a subject of philosophical inquiry, and subsequent scientific advancements have led to more integrated views of the relationship between mind and body.
Does Stolorow and Atwood’s Post-Cartesian Psychoanalysis have anything to do with Advaita Verdanta？(ChatGPT) (2024-1-1)
Stolorow and Atwood's post-Cartesian psychoanalysis, as outlined in their book "Contexts of Being: The Intersubjective Foundations of Psychological Life," emphasizes the importance of intersubjectivity and the relational context in understanding human experience. This approach moves away from the traditional Cartesian dualism, which separates the individual mind from the external world. While there may be some conceptual parallels with certain aspects of Advaita Vedanta, it's crucial to note that these are different intellectual traditions with distinct goals and cultural contexts.
The potential connections between Stolorow and Atwood's post-Cartesian psychoanalysis and Advaita Vedanta include:
Non-dualism: Both perspectives challenge dualistic frameworks. Advaita Vedanta posits a non-dualistic reality where distinctions between subject and object, self and other, dissolve in the ultimate reality (Brahman). Stolorow and Atwood, in their intersubjective approach, also challenge the Cartesian separation between subject and object, emphasizing the interconnectedness of individuals within a relational context.
Contextual Understanding: Stolorow and Atwood highlight the importance of understanding psychological experiences in context, considering the relational and intersubjective factors that shape individual subjectivity. Similarly, Advaita Vedanta encourages an understanding of individual experiences in the broader context of the ultimate reality and the interconnectedness of all existence.
Emphasis on Experience: Both perspectives place a significant emphasis on the exploration of subjective experience. Stolorow and Atwood focus on the lived experience of individuals within relational contexts, while Advaita Vedanta emphasizes self-realization and direct experiential knowledge of one's true nature.
Despite these potential parallels, it's essential to recognize that Stolorow and Atwood's psychoanalytic framework is rooted in Western psychology, particularly within the context of existential-phenomenological thought. Advaita Vedanta, on the other hand, is a product of ancient Indian philosophical traditions. While there may be convergences in certain philosophical themes, any similarities are more likely the result of a convergence of universal ideas rather than direct influence. Additionally, the terminology and cultural contexts differ significantly between these two traditions.
Does psychoanalysis have anything to do with Advaita Verdanta ? (ChatGPT) (2024-1-1)
Psychoanalysis and Advaita Vedanta come from very different intellectual traditions and address distinct aspects of human experience. Psychoanalysis, developed by Sigmund Freud and later expanded by others like Carl Jung and Jacques Lacan, is a psychological and therapeutic framework primarily concerned with understanding and treating mental and emotional disorders. Advaita Vedanta, on the other hand, is a school of Hindu philosophy focused on metaphysics and the nature of ultimate reality.
While these two systems don't have direct connections, there are some conceptual overlaps and parallels that have been noted:
Understanding the Mind: Both psychoanalysis and Advaita Vedanta involve an exploration of the nature of the mind. Psychoanalysis delves into the unconscious mind, examining the influence of repressed thoughts and desires on behavior. Advaita Vedanta, while not a psychological theory per se, delves into the nature of consciousness and the mind as it relates to the ultimate reality (Brahman).
Non-dualism: Advaita Vedanta emphasizes non-dualism (Advaita), asserting that the ultimate reality (Brahman) is without a second, transcending all distinctions. While psychoanalysis doesn't explicitly engage in metaphysical discussions about the nature of ultimate reality, some parallels can be drawn in the sense that both systems challenge simplistic dualistic views, whether it's the conscious/unconscious divide in psychoanalysis or the subject/object duality in Advaita Vedanta.
Self-Exploration and Liberation: Both systems, in their own ways, involve a process of self-exploration. Psychoanalysis aims at understanding the depths of one's psyche to resolve conflicts and achieve psychological well-being. Advaita Vedanta advocates self-realization and understanding one's true nature to attain liberation (moksha) from the cycle of birth and death.
Despite these conceptual parallels, it's essential to recognize the distinct frameworks and goals of psychoanalysis and Advaita Vedanta. Psychoanalysis is a Western psychological and therapeutic framework rooted in the 19th and 20th centuries, while Advaita Vedanta is a product of ancient Indian philosophical traditions. Any similarities are more likely due to a convergence of certain universal themes in human thought rather than direct influence.
Does Spinoza have anything to do with Advaita Verdanta ? (ChatGPT) (2024-1-1)
Baruch Spinoza, a 17th-century Dutch philosopher, and Advaita Vedanta, a school of Hindu philosophy, share some similarities in their philosophical perspectives, particularly in the areas of metaphysics and the nature of reality. However, it's essential to note that these similarities are not due to direct influence, as Spinoza and Advaita Vedanta emerged in different cultural and historical contexts.
Similarities between Spinoza's philosophy and Advaita Vedanta include:
Monism: Both Spinoza and Advaita Vedanta advocate a monistic view of reality. Spinoza's philosophy is often described as pantheistic or panentheistic, asserting that God and nature are one and the same. Similarly, Advaita Vedanta posits a non-dualistic reality (Brahman) where all distinctions between individual entities dissolve.
Nature of God/Ultimate Reality: Spinoza's concept of God as the infinite substance that constitutes the entire reality bears some resemblance to the Advaitic idea of Brahman as the ultimate, formless reality that underlies and pervades the entire universe.
Denial of Dualism: Both Spinoza and Advaita Vedanta reject dualism, the idea that there are fundamentally separate substances or entities. They argue for a holistic view where everything is interconnected and part of a singular, ultimate reality.
Ethics and Liberation: Spinoza's ethical philosophy, as outlined in his work "Ethics," shares some similarities with the Advaitic notion of liberation (moksha). Both philosophies emphasize the importance of understanding the true nature of reality to achieve a state of peace, contentment, and liberation from ignorance.
Despite these similarities, it's crucial to recognize the distinct cultural and historical contexts in which Spinoza and Advaita Vedanta arose. Spinoza was a European philosopher in the 17th century, while Advaita Vedanta is rooted in ancient Indian philosophical traditions. The similarities may be considered parallel developments in the exploration of certain metaphysical and ethical ideas rather than direct intellectual influence.
哲學就是哲學前提的不完美的推論
ethics vs freedom
1130101 (星期一) (Advaita Vedanta)(Negativity vs Vitality)
Sunday, December 31, 2023
Nisargadatta Maharaj (尼薩加達塔·馬哈拉) (1897-1981)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nisargadatta_Maharaj
an Indian guru of nondualism, belonging to the Inchagiri Sampradaya, a lineage of teachers from the Navnath Sampradaya.
The publication in 1973 of I Am That, an English translation of his talks in Marathi by Maurice Frydman, brought him worldwide recognition and followers, especially from North America and Europe.[1]
Adi Shankara (Adi Shankaracharya) (阿迪·商羯羅) (c 700-750 CE)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adi_Shankara
https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%98%BF%E8%BF%AA%C2%B7%E5%95%86%E7%BE%AF%E7%BD%97
阿迪·商羯羅（馬拉雅拉姆語： ആദി ശങ്കരന്, 天城文： आदि शङ्कर, Ādi Śaṅkara, 發音為/aːd̪i ɕaŋkərə/，788年—820年），印度教的創立者、吠檀多派的集大成者、不二論的創立者。商羯羅屬於南布迪里婆羅門種姓。
簡介
阿迪·商羯羅是印度著名的哲學家。商羯羅曾經研究過佛學，並且受到佛敎教義所影響，卻又努力使印傳佛教信奉者和耆那教信奉者改信當時印度的主流宗教，並且去除不少傳統宗教的陳舊教義（例如婆羅門至上的思想和對於婆羅嘉摩神的信仰）丶把婆羅門教改為印度教，以及把佛敎神話中的一些人物吸納至印度教神話當中，導致後來不少印度教信奉者將釋迦牟尼佛視為毘世努神的化身。
吠檀多不二論（梵語：Advaita Vedānta)
https://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-tw/%E5%90%A0%E6%AA%80%E5%A4%9A%E4%B8%8D%E4%BA%8C%E8%AB%96
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advaita_Vedanta
吠檀多不二論（梵語：Advaita Vedānta，天城文：अद्वैत वेदान्त，IPA：/əd̪vait̪ə veːd̪ɑːnt̪ə/）是印度哲學中最為突出的韋丹塔（即吠檀多），梵文Vedanta的字面意思是吠陀（Veda）的終極結論，也就是吠陀經典（Veda）的最後結論。 Advaita，字面解非二元或不二，是一種一元思想體系。Advaita主要指自我（Atman）和梵（Brahman）是絕對一和同（one and the same）；另一個主要的術語Advitiya，意思是除了梵之外沒有任何是一切事物）。第一個有系統整理不二論的而且著作還依然廣泛流傳的是商羯羅[1]。
van life with no such thing as metaphysics (12/31/23) (星期日)
Saturday, December 30, 2023
1121230 (息壤 6-6) (自體的心理學)
從自體心理學到自體的心理學
起因是，「Psychotherapy and its discontents」 (心理治療及其不滿)
1. 那個人，遂橫空出世，惟來路茫茫，已恍若隔世，
2. 除非他內化了某種形上結構，否則不得救贖，
3. 除非他遇見了他者，否則不得逃逸 (lines of flight)，
4. 除非他變成了量子碎片，否則不得自由，
5. 但是，因為他就是量子碎片，所以他必自由，
6. 形體，詐 (乍) 現爾，
7. 此詐 (乍) 現之身 (生)，他如何用，
8. 正考驗著，那個人，
共匪屠殺數千萬高中生，侯友宜趙少康柯文哲斥鉅資出兵支持河南寧陵反共民變
van life metaphysics