I am sharing a video of Dr. Bernardo Kastrup, a double doctorate in computer science and analytical philosophy, on the topic of materialism versus idealism. I have posted this video especially for agnostic friends and readers who are temperamentally left-leaning. I hope friends will have the patience to see the presentation fully. Some friends to whom the post has been linked may be motivated to read Dr. Kastrup’s books and most although averse to the idea, may give a thought to the subject. This note is also for the spiritual-minded who may benefit from the clarifying video of Dr. Kastrup.
A little bit of background information is called for.
I lean strongly towards Marxism because I think Marx and Engels analyzed history most rationally and scientifically, building upon a sound philosophical foundation. Marx’s dialectical materialism and historical materialism are based on Hegelian dialectics, which is essentially idealistic and which is not very dissimilar from Vedanta. Marx borrowed the Hegelian dialectical concept and adopted it to analyze the history of mankind and predict its future course in materialistic-dialectical terms. Marxist theory is egalitarian and aims towards a classless and boundary-less society of free men. It is free of tribalism and identity politics of religion/nation/language/gender, etc. It teaches against divisive hatred and is against violence and war. But it recognizes class struggles throughout the history of mankind as the basis of all changes and predicts similar un-peaceful changes in the future as an inevitability, arising from the clash of class interests between the haves and the have-nots and takes the side of the unprivileged (a stance opposed by the rightist forces and by some common folks who have been indoctrinated by the rightist propaganda).
But Marx does not really deal with ontology. Marxist materialism is not a set of statements about the cosmos, such as ‘‘Everything is made out of atoms’’ or ‘‘There is no God.’’ It is a theory of how historical animals function’. In this, the psychological-motivational aspects of the subject-self are not given importance. This has almost led the deterministic materialist atheists (who hold that the matter is the ontological reality from which consciousness emerges or consciousness is an illusion arising out of electrochemical reactions) to subvert Marxism to their point of view. This makes some self-proclaimed Marxists act supercilious towards the theists or idealists, thereby reducing their acceptance and chances of success towards the final goal of a classless society. This automatically creates a division among people — an outcome that Marx would never approve of.
There are records that show that Marx was contemptible towards the simplistic nature of atheist’s philosophy; that he favored the increase of spirituality in human life; that he acknowledged that religions emerged in response to angst-filled existences of common folks; and that he recommended that his wife spend time in communion with Jewish priests rather than in superficial society to manage her existential angst.
Materialism holds that there is nothing beyond and above the objects of sensual perception and that the perceived matter is the source of the power of cognition. How naive this is? How simplistic and contradictory. The axiomatic conclusion that there is nothing beyond the perceived matter, is itself not empirical. Materialism and capitalism are actually props for each other. The materialist credo 'Matter is primary' is bolstered by the capitalist credo "You purchase my TV and be happy forever".
The Vedanta (and other religions), on the other hand, teach that the ontological truth is non-dual of the nature of consciousness on which 'space-time-objects' make an appearance — the whole of the universe being comprised of infinitely diverse experiences. There is almost no way to validate this except through first-person experience since consciousness is prior to the mind. The implication of the Vedantic teaching is that a person can train to realize oneself as the experiencer rather than as the object of experience and thus be free of the pain of self's association with body-mind. It is fair to say that although Marx acknowledged this need for freedom as a justified goal, he disagreed with the method and the individualistic focus, holding that removing inequalities in society would free mankind of all angst. I personally differ. A truly egalitarian society may mitigate many painful conditions of human existence but will not help solve the problem of personal angst that essentially originates in the erroneous idea that one is a separate 'self' counterposed against the whole universe -- a notion that engenders the fear of the other and all kinds of sectarianism.
It is heartening to see that the work of some scientists and modern analytical philosophers logically leads to the essence of Vedanta. Dr. Kastrup is in forefront of this group. The linked video ‘Small Theory of Everything’, is uncharacteristically brief. Dr. Kastrup shows why materialism is untenable, he proposes an alternative worldview of 'consciousness first’, and provides scientific and logical support for the proposed worldview.
A little bit of background information is called for.
I lean strongly towards Marxism because I think Marx and Engels analyzed history most rationally and scientifically, building upon a sound philosophical foundation. Marx’s dialectical materialism and historical materialism are based on Hegelian dialectics, which is essentially idealistic and which is not very dissimilar from Vedanta. Marx borrowed the Hegelian dialectical concept and adopted it to analyze the history of mankind and predict its future course in materialistic-dialectical terms. Marxist theory is egalitarian and aims towards a classless and boundary-less society of free men. It is free of tribalism and identity politics of religion/nation/language/gender, etc. It teaches against divisive hatred and is against violence and war. But it recognizes class struggles throughout the history of mankind as the basis of all changes and predicts similar un-peaceful changes in the future as an inevitability, arising from the clash of class interests between the haves and the have-nots and takes the side of the unprivileged (a stance opposed by the rightist forces and by some common folks who have been indoctrinated by the rightist propaganda).
But Marx does not really deal with ontology. Marxist materialism is not a set of statements about the cosmos, such as ‘‘Everything is made out of atoms’’ or ‘‘There is no God.’’ It is a theory of how historical animals function’. In this, the psychological-motivational aspects of the subject-self are not given importance. This has almost led the deterministic materialist atheists (who hold that the matter is the ontological reality from which consciousness emerges or consciousness is an illusion arising out of electrochemical reactions) to subvert Marxism to their point of view. This makes some self-proclaimed Marxists act supercilious towards the theists or idealists, thereby reducing their acceptance and chances of success towards the final goal of a classless society. This automatically creates a division among people — an outcome that Marx would never approve of.
There are records that show that Marx was contemptible towards the simplistic nature of atheist’s philosophy; that he favored the increase of spirituality in human life; that he acknowledged that religions emerged in response to angst-filled existences of common folks; and that he recommended that his wife spend time in communion with Jewish priests rather than in superficial society to manage her existential angst.
Materialism holds that there is nothing beyond and above the objects of sensual perception and that the perceived matter is the source of the power of cognition. How naive this is? How simplistic and contradictory. The axiomatic conclusion that there is nothing beyond the perceived matter, is itself not empirical. Materialism and capitalism are actually props for each other. The materialist credo 'Matter is primary' is bolstered by the capitalist credo "You purchase my TV and be happy forever".
The Vedanta (and other religions), on the other hand, teach that the ontological truth is non-dual of the nature of consciousness on which 'space-time-objects' make an appearance — the whole of the universe being comprised of infinitely diverse experiences. There is almost no way to validate this except through first-person experience since consciousness is prior to the mind. The implication of the Vedantic teaching is that a person can train to realize oneself as the experiencer rather than as the object of experience and thus be free of the pain of self's association with body-mind. It is fair to say that although Marx acknowledged this need for freedom as a justified goal, he disagreed with the method and the individualistic focus, holding that removing inequalities in society would free mankind of all angst. I personally differ. A truly egalitarian society may mitigate many painful conditions of human existence but will not help solve the problem of personal angst that essentially originates in the erroneous idea that one is a separate 'self' counterposed against the whole universe -- a notion that engenders the fear of the other and all kinds of sectarianism.
It is heartening to see that the work of some scientists and modern analytical philosophers logically leads to the essence of Vedanta. Dr. Kastrup is in forefront of this group. The linked video ‘Small Theory of Everything’, is uncharacteristically brief. Dr. Kastrup shows why materialism is untenable, he proposes an alternative worldview of 'consciousness first’, and provides scientific and logical support for the proposed worldview.