I am a retired Philosophy teacher who taught at Monterey Peninsula College, California. I will be sharing here my thoughts on various philosophical topics and issues of living. Any comments and feedback will be appreciated.
Any comments and feedback will be appreciated.
Friday, October 12, 2007
Reflection 2
The skeptical questions are based on a point of view, namely, that life must have some value and that it must amount to something. In other words, he is not willing to just go! If he does, there is no problem remaining!
2 comments:
Anonymous
said...
I enjoyed your piece on UG Krishnamurti very much. It is very well written and concise. I couldn't help noticing how similar some of his teaching is to his namesake, J.Krishnamurti, e.g. there being no self, the thinker is the thought, and so on. How much do you think UG was influenced by JK?
I can't deny the similarities. But there are also profound differences.
For example, UG says you can never know a thought except through another thought.
He also pooh-poohed inquiry. His contention is that there is no need for inquiry, nothing to understand nor is there anything that needs to to be transformed.
To my mind that indeed is radical and profoundly different from JK.
If there are influences, they have to be influences either in the realm of ideas or some other 'metahphysical' influences which we cannot talk about. Neither of them really explain what happened to UG, irrespective of the similarities in some of the things they had said. I don't think any influence can bring that about, even some of the practices UG had gone through.
As for myself, I wouldn't worry about whether or not UG was influenced or to what degree, as much as how I would relate to UG's teaching or what it does to me.
2 comments:
I enjoyed your piece on UG Krishnamurti very much. It is very well written and concise. I couldn't help noticing how similar some of his teaching is to his namesake, J.Krishnamurti, e.g. there being no self, the thinker is the thought, and so on. How much do you think UG was influenced by JK?
Thanks for your compliment.
I can't deny the similarities. But there are also profound differences.
For example, UG says you can never know a thought except through another thought.
He also pooh-poohed inquiry. His contention is that there is no need for inquiry, nothing to understand nor is there anything that needs to to be transformed.
To my mind that indeed is radical and profoundly different from JK.
If there are influences, they have to be influences either in the realm of ideas or some other 'metahphysical' influences which we cannot talk about. Neither of them really explain what happened to UG, irrespective of the similarities in some of the things they had said. I don't think any influence can bring that about, even some of the practices UG had gone through.
As for myself, I wouldn't worry about whether or not UG was influenced or to what degree, as much as how I would relate to UG's teaching or what it does to me.
Post a Comment