WHAT IS LIFE? #21 A philosophical conversation with Tim Freke and Ilia Delio
Vložit
- čas přidán 23. 08. 2024
- Private conversations made public for you to explore ideas with us.
Ilia and I discuss the pioneering work of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, life and death, the power of love and being 'pilgrims from the future'.
Ilia Delio, OSF holds the Josephine C. Connelly Endowed Chair in Theology at Villanova Universe. She is the author of twenty-two books and numerous articles. Prior to Villanova she taught at Georgetown University where she was the Haub Director of Catholic Studies and Washington Theological Union. She lectures nationally and internationally on various topics in Science and Religion, including religion and evolution, consciousness and complexity, integral ecology and artificial intelligence. Her recent books The Unbearable Wholeness of Being: God, Evolution and the Power of Love, From Teilhard to Omega (Orbis, 2014) for which she won the 2014 Silver Nautilus Book Award and a Catholic Press Association Book Award in Faith and Science and Making All Things New: Catholicity, Cosmology and Consciousness (Orbis, 2015) which was a 2019 finalist for the Michael Ramsey Prize.
#timfreke #iliadelio #whatislife #philosophy #emergentspirituality #consciousness #evolutionofthesoul #pierreteilharddechardin #lifeanddeath #love
T!M FREKE
👁 INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY OF UNIVIDUALS
Join T!M Freke for weekly discussions with his Online Community
timfreke.com/I...
ℹ️ Author of 35 books, translated into over 15 languages
ℹ️ #50 Most Spiritually Influential Living People 2020, Watkins Magazine
ℹ️ 📚 Winner of Writer of the Year 2020, Kindred Spirit
💬 timfreke.com/
💬 info@timfreke.com
💬 @timfreke
💬 timfreke.podbe...
❗️ TED talk: • Are We Clever Monkeys ...
❗️ New Beginning World Conference talk: • Individuals Evolving i...
❗️ What is Life? Series: bit.ly/whatisl...
Delia is an underrated progressive, thought provoking theologian, whose work should be more widely promoted. Thank you Tim.
This is one of my favourite conversation so far.
Outstanding conversation. Gives me so much hope in the future. The conversation was a dance of two outstanding souls ❤️
What a beautiful lady. She's my kind of catholic....xx
I caught this early, only fifteen views so far! These are some of the most interesting conversations of this kind on the internet, I like the openness, always thought-provoking even when I am not altogether in sympathy with the the viewpoint of the speakers.
So pleased to hear your reaction
12:50:00 “Nature is at home with itself but we are not, what drives us?”. I would not say that most people want to constantly change, but (unlike animals) humans all benefit from a few pioneering individuals who figure something out and broadcast the discovery to everyone. Animals have no means of communicating across the whole species.
Willingly suffering to help another is definitely a sign of deep love and care, but I don't believe it's necessary for the "highest level of love" to be reached and experienced.
I've often been intrigued why people use the word God in place of other words which we already have. For example, 'God is absolute love'. Why are we not simply saying 'absolute love' then? I think God works for the classic big man in the sky, but aside from that I prefer to use natural language otherwise it feels we are shoehorning God in at each opportunity.
Sorry if you think this sounds negative, but I bet if you could go back in time, the people alive then would be able to show us and teach us amazing things as well.
we forget things for sure - i couldn't exist as a hunter gatherer for long! and we forget wisdom too i suspect.
The East has Advaita Vedanta philosophy, but it has Dvaita Vedanta as well.
Yes indeed. The Indian philosophical tradition is incredible rich and various, which is often over looked in the West.
I didn't know this, thanks for pointing this out. As Rodney Dangerfield might say, 'my Dualism gets no respect'. But why not dualism? Isn't life about the dance of yin and yang, matter and spirit?
Where is episode #20 with Bernardo Kastrup?
Tim, in holistic totality, all possibilities can and may emerge. However, I've put this to you before. I cannot overstate the importance of the following question. Namely, can you ever not have Existence? Just thinking about that, I believe, will yield critical insights. Thanks if you choose to have a go at it.
I think you are completely right. I could not agree more . that is why Being is the ground of everything for me
@@TimFreke1 Absolutely :) I've closely followed your work and have discerned that, like me, you postulate that Being = Existence . Would that be a fair statement? If so, non-existence can only exist as a concept within Existence, right? There is a very good reason why scientists cannot (and will not) get b4 The Big Bang. The likes of Hawking was smart in his area and within his own paradigm but concept and direct experience of reality are not the same. The universe is eternal IMHO. There was no Big Bang IMHO. Hopefully you'll see this comment in its entirety.
@@Seanus32 But it seems that there has to have been a moment zero before which there was no change in the Being, therefore no time to speak of. Otherwise we end up with an infinite regress of causes/processes, which doesn't seem like a possibility to me.
@@laurisolups6563 Ah, a change in the Being. Infinite regress is a pure human construct. Time is a marker. There are many experiences we can undergo which blast time outside the equation, right? Let me put it this way. You cannot disprove that the universe is eternal, right? What else would you have? No-thingness is itself an existent and 'necessarily so' It is the necessary existent and holder. I don't think time should be your focus but your state. God didn't need a cause as God necessarily IS. Ubiquitous Being. What I'd like to hear from you is how pure 'quintessence' became homo sapiens. Any thoughts?
@@Seanus32 For some reason I can't see all your comment. Sorry about that. Seems like we are a lot of agreement here. I think we may find that before the 'Big Bang' (Tiny Silence?) were previous universes from which this one has arisen. So that Being is always in the process of Becoming. The One is always in relationship with itself.
15:47 - Separate? Yes and no. It's a matter of perspective. Yes from the dual perspective that it's locational consciousness within infinite consciousness (the 'carrier' or 'holder' of all the contents, the universe) and, as such, is dissociative. Nondual I can only describe as 'shared, ubiquitous essence' ... there are levels to this.
I like this ''shared, ubiquitous essence' ... essence from Latin Esse 'to be' ... essence is Being ... 'shared, ubiquitous Being' ... that's it!
@@TimFreke1 Exactly! Thanks also for introducing me to Bernardo's work. He provides new insights into panpsychism Vs idealism. It gets rather intricate and nuanced when we draft in pantheism, panentheism and then idealism as he frames it etc. Like yourself, I look for the common link, the common ground. Something pervasive and all-permeating. Thanks also for the discussion with this lady. She was not what I expected, being a Catholic theologian but people can surprise you :) Don't judge a book by its cover and all that jazz. Best not judge at all :)
Phaogenisis sounds interesting. Are we here on Earth to experience what the divine cannot ? Are we the ripe fruit? Or are we a cosmic fluke of nature. A very , very , very lucky selfish gene.? ……. Or both spiritual/mind and physical? A trinity if you like ? A seed (male energy) evolving through different eons of time?
Whenever I hear the phrase "the one in relationship to itself" I sort of cringe. Not sure why because the idea that we all at some point separated from a uniform being doesn't seem so far off to me. Maybe it's because it doesn't feel right to call it "one" anymore. The phrase seems to imply some sort of illusory nature to our individuality, even though I know that you, Tim, don't hold such a view. Just sharing my thoughts as I listen along.
OK Lauris. What I am suggesting is 'paralogical'. Both one and two ... as in Taoism in essence. When I say the phrase you mention it always feel kind of obvious.
@@TimFreke1 I just realized what my problem is. I don't think there is a "one" as a conscious subject. I don't think existence/universe as a whole is conscious. I am conscious and I am part of the whole, and in essence share the same quality of consciousness as every other being, but I am not the whole, no one is!
@@laurisolups6563 I agreeing with you in that I don't see the one as a conscious subject that gives rise to the universe. That is the old spiritual model i am disputing. But I do think that from this process a transcendent Being is arising (God if you will). So the one is becoming conscious ... through us.
I think this whole idea of "dying to yourself" before you really die is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. There's nothing about being a separate individual that stops me from realising loving consciousness in me and in others.
Hmmm...having difficulty grasping these concepts...towards, beyond, more, ...Dude...I can’t even “SEE” the moment , or now, or the past😂....how do you (see ) them?...maybe through the concept of IAM....🤔
we have very recently entered female energy eon of time after 10,0000 years of male energy.
I must say, I feel a little annoyed to think of religion accepting evolution. Religion has ignored science for centuries and threatened eternal torture. I’m sorry, I don’t think religion can simply join forces with science - frankly, what is the point of religion? Spirituality is a different thing and is best left to kind people, like Tim, rather than hateful religions.
I have written a few books attacking Literalist religion so I know what you mean! But people within the religious traditions are diverse and Ilia and Teilhard are very spiritual people who happen to have lived their lives in this environment, which I chose not to do. Worth remembering also that the modern scientific idea of the big bang and the evolving universe was created by Georges Lemaître who was a Catholic priest. Life is ironic that is for sure! 😀
@@TimFreke1 Yes, I know there are many ways of looking at it, but seems strange that a Catholic priest gave birth to the idea an evolving universe, surely that is at odds with the teaching of the Bible?