After Socrates Episode 23

 [00:00:00] Christopher Mastropietro: When they burn through the process, I don't know what I'm going to be. Right. It's like the aspirational, uh, uh, transfer, like a transformative experience that LA top Paul talks about. Right. I don't know what I'm going to be in the fumes that, that, that, that are emitted by the burning of, of those ideas and beliefs,[00:00:20]

[00:00:37] Dr. John Vervaeke: uh, I'm joined again, [00:00:40] the usual suspects. And, uh, so here with Taylor Barrett, Guy Sendstock and Christopher master Pietro. Um, and what we want to do is we want to draw things together and put them into a really Socratic mode. Um, and what we're going to do in this episode is we're going to, [00:01:00] not in the same detail we did in 10a and 10b, but we're going to get into dialectic in the Dialogos.

[00:01:07] Dr. John Vervaeke: And the virtue that we're going to be doing this about is dialectic itself. So we're doing this interesting Socratic thing of applying The very practice to trying to more deeply [00:01:20] examine and understand potentially reform that practice. So um, what's going to happen is, um, we'll, we'll do just a, a, a brief dipping into some of the preliminary practices that go into the preparation for dialectic interdialogos and [00:01:40] then we'll go into that.

[00:01:41] Dr. John Vervaeke: So welcome everyone. So we will begin first, uh, just doing a basic mindfulness practice, perhaps, uh, think about going through the three centerings, centering the body, uh, centering attention, centering your attitude. We'll do that [00:02:00] for maybe two or three minutes. And then I'll say we're going to shift to the Neoplatonic Contemplation, and I'll just give you, I won't do the detailed explanations, I'll just give us the benchmarks, um, and then we'll turn things over to Guy who will take us through a few, um, uh, of the, the exercises drawn from the circling, [00:02:20] uh, uh, tradition, and then Chris is going to give us a quick overview of the basic stages, just, just a reminder, uh, for what's going on in the dialectic.

[00:02:32] Dr. John Vervaeke: What goes on in Dialectic in the Dialogos, and then we'll undertake it. All right, so let's begin by [00:02:40] centering.

[00:02:46] Dr. John Vervaeke: Remember to do the three centerings. And[00:03:00] [00:03:20] [00:03:40] [00:04:00]

[00:04:14] Dr. John Vervaeke: move now from the meditation to the contemplation

[00:04:16] Taylor Barrett: practice.

[00:04:19] Dr. John Vervaeke: Come [00:04:20] into an awareness of all of your senses. Not so much the content, but the how. Sense of contact, receptivity, reciprocal opening.[00:04:40]

[00:04:49] Dr. John Vervaeke: Now into awareness of awareness.

[00:04:56] Dr. John Vervaeke: Within and without,[00:05:00]

[00:05:16] Dr. John Vervaeke: reciprocal opening of phusis,[00:05:20]

[00:05:34] Dr. John Vervaeke: psuche,[00:05:40]

[00:05:46] Dr. John Vervaeke: noesis,

[00:05:57] Dr. John Vervaeke: now how all three [00:06:00] interpenetrate, and the one one ing of henosis,

[00:06:19] Dr. John Vervaeke: [00:06:20] kenosis,[00:06:40]

[00:06:46] Dr. John Vervaeke: theosis,[00:07:00] [00:07:20]

[00:07:21] Dr. John Vervaeke: slowly come out of this practice, trying as best you can to integrate what you cultivated in this practice with your everyday consciousness. Cognition, character, and community.[00:07:40] [00:08:00]

[00:08:01] Guy Sengstock: Just one round, my left. Just bringing that awareness into the body, into internal emotion, thoughts, experience mostly within your skin, and then come to [00:08:20] terms with them through this sentence stem. What I'm noticing right now is that What I'm noticing right now is a warm hum, sensing a warm hum from my toes pretty evenly all the way up [00:08:40] to my face.

[00:08:43] Guy Sengstock: I'm noticing the movement of my, feeling the movement of my arms, the vibration of my voice and my chest and my face and the mind, the [00:09:00] space of the mind. Like a warm clarity.

[00:09:19] Taylor Barrett: Pressure [00:09:20] against my lower belly,

[00:09:27] Taylor Barrett: quality of contact. with my chair,

[00:09:35] Taylor Barrett: the dryness of the air through my nostril,[00:09:40]

[00:09:44] Taylor Barrett: and how still my body is.

[00:09:56] Taylor Barrett: What I'm noticing now

[00:09:58] Dr. John Vervaeke: is a difference[00:10:00]

[00:10:02] Dr. John Vervaeke: between the left and right side of my body, especially lower tension and pain on the left side,

[00:10:16] Dr. John Vervaeke: much more relaxed. Right,[00:10:20]

[00:10:22] Dr. John Vervaeke: but nevertheless, A sense of stilling towards the center, a sense of opening to the horizon, a

[00:10:37] Dr. John Vervaeke: sense of slowing down,[00:10:40]

[00:10:43] Dr. John Vervaeke: more receptivity,

[00:10:54] Dr. John Vervaeke: and

[00:10:59] Dr. John Vervaeke: a [00:11:00] longing.

[00:11:07] Christopher Mastropietro: What I'm noticing right now is a, a chill, chill around the outside, my extremities,[00:11:20]

[00:11:23] Christopher Mastropietro: and a leaden feeling, heaviness, running up and down. Arms and legs,

[00:11:33] Christopher Mastropietro: but at the center of warmth and a lightness[00:11:40]

[00:11:42] Christopher Mastropietro: and an upward movement.

[00:11:47] Christopher Mastropietro: Even if, even as everything else seems to pull in, to be pulling down.

[00:11:56] Guy Sengstock: And as we stay with that cultivation [00:12:00] of awareness that we've just called forth and presence, I want you just to everyone to be really conscious as you slowly open to your, open your eyes to Continue to allow that sense of presence to stay really close to you as you come [00:12:20] into relationship with your visual field.

[00:12:27] Guy Sengstock: And then without necessarily looking at anybody, just becoming aware of the human beings next to you. And then [00:12:40] just take a moment, just begin to just look to the left and to the right. And just

[00:12:50] Guy Sengstock: be present to the thou. And then... So what we'll do this time is, the [00:13:00] instructions are, say something you're noticing with, in this case, Chris, and then come back and reveal yourself. So it'd be, Chris, I'm noticing, and now I'm experiencing, or now I'm feeling. So I'll go [00:13:20] with you first.

[00:13:24] Guy Sengstock: Oh man, Chris, the moment I just got present with you right there, I just felt like a movement of love. In my heart that feels like it's growing and lots of [00:13:40] affinity and, uh, growing. I'm noticing you occur to me as somebody more and more in my future

[00:13:52] Guy Sengstock: and, and I feel gratitude and comfort and [00:14:00] something like family

[00:14:10] Guy Sengstock: being with you. I'm noticing, Hey, will I notice that? Mm. And the stillness in your [00:14:20] eyes. and what strikes me is a tenacity and an un, an unquenchable quench hunger for whatever this is, and a deliberateness about [00:14:40] confronting it, being with it, knowing it, and seeing that or noticing that I being with you. I feel like a sense of brotherhood and a kinship, and a, and a deep respect for you.[00:15:00]

[00:15:05] Guy Sengstock: Being with you, I noticed this very similar sense of warmth and a feeling of just famil. More of a visceral familiarity with you and a connection of belonging and close [00:15:20] closeness with you that feels like from this trip in particular, and feel grateful for. I feel grateful for a growing friendship. Feel a lot of love for you.

[00:15:37] Guy Sengstock: Yeah. And hearing, [00:15:40] saying, I just did that, but just say, saying that or seeing. I feel at home with you.[00:16:00]

[00:16:03] Taylor Barrett: Being with you I notice

[00:16:08] Taylor Barrett: like this river, like a raging underneath my stillness that wants to like break through and play [00:16:20] with you.

[00:16:25] Taylor Barrett: Yeah. It's like a curiosity and like an excitement.

[00:16:34] Taylor Barrett: Hmm. Having said that, I notice like a bit of a bracing, [00:16:40] like a nervousness or an anxiousness. How's that planned for Chris? Yeah.

[00:16:53] Taylor Barrett: Hmm.

[00:16:59] Taylor Barrett: Being with [00:17:00] you. And it was like the energy shift more up into my chest,

[00:17:08] Taylor Barrett: I can notice an opening in my chest,

[00:17:17] Taylor Barrett: comfort or [00:17:20] some flavor of safety, relaxation.

[00:17:30] Taylor Barrett: Yeah, having said that, now I notice, uh, melt a little bit more into this chair. I'm[00:17:40]

[00:17:51] Taylor Barrett: aware of like this energy for me, like building and emanating in my chest. [00:18:00] Just feel this gratitude.

[00:18:07] Taylor Barrett: Yeah. And there's like a happiness

[00:18:13] Taylor Barrett: for what you do and for who you are.[00:18:20]

[00:18:21] Taylor Barrett: Yeah. And it's like, um, it's almost like this kind of nervous, like a fluttery sort of energy.

[00:18:33] Taylor Barrett: Yeah. Uh, having said that, I [00:18:40] notice I feel a little shy,

[00:18:47] Taylor Barrett: a bit young

[00:18:53] Taylor Barrett: and touched in some way.[00:19:00]

[00:19:14] Dr. John Vervaeke: Being with you, Chris. I'm always amazed by, I [00:19:20] feel like just suddenly and effortlessly I go to the depths and there's a kind of joyful playfulness there and I, an enjoyment of that. And[00:19:40]

[00:19:42] Dr. John Vervaeke: having said that, I can feel this bubbling cheerfulness in me and I, and a longing to see more. I, I feel like often with you, I'm. listening, like, to [00:20:00] music, and I really just, I love it, really love it.

[00:20:15] Dr. John Vervaeke: Hi, being with you,[00:20:20]

[00:20:20] Dr. John Vervaeke: I'm noticing you calling a stillness out in me that seems different this time than before. And I feel a kind of deepening of resonance because of that.

[00:20:39] Dr. John Vervaeke: And [00:20:40] having said that,

[00:20:44] Dr. John Vervaeke: I'm appreciating the wisdom of you in a really, sort of felt sense.

[00:20:56] Dr. John Vervaeke: It hasn't been as forefront for me as before,[00:21:00]

[00:21:07] Dr. John Vervaeke: dealing with you, Taylor. I immediately, I, I get, I get this sort of ex ex, I feel excited. Uh, I, I feel [00:21:20] a kind of what's gonna happen and I feel this sense of security in that which I don. I always have with people that it's safe to do that with you, and, uh, I [00:21:40] like the way it goes. And having said that, I'm feeling a bit of regret right now because...

[00:21:49] Dr. John Vervaeke: Um, you're not quite as much in my life as I would like.

[00:21:56] Dr. John Vervaeke: I'm just not, I hadn't realized that until just

[00:21:59] Christopher Mastropietro: now.[00:22:00]

[00:22:10] Christopher Mastropietro: Being with you, Guy, I just feel absolute sense of brotherhood, family, [00:22:20] and kind of ease and comfort that comes with many, many, many years. And yet, in this case, came without and seemed not to need it.

[00:22:35] Christopher Mastropietro: And having said that, I'm realizing how much [00:22:40] clearer that has become. Just in these last few days, even though it didn't seem to need to be any clearer before.[00:23:00]

[00:23:03] Christopher Mastropietro: Being with you, Taylor, I feel this... This kind of giddy playfulness, there's like something awry, some expectancy. I have this sense of having had a hundred conversations, [00:23:20] and having forgotten them all. And looking forward to having them again, so that we can remember what they contained.

[00:23:33] Christopher Mastropietro: And having said that, I'm sensing that maybe, maybe it's mutual [00:23:40] enough for that to be a real possibility. And I find myself looking forward to it.

[00:23:55] Christopher Mastropietro: Being with you, my friend, I just feel like home.[00:24:00]

[00:24:01] Christopher Mastropietro: And no need to say anything else. And having said that, having

[00:24:11] Christopher Mastropietro: said that, I'm grateful that at this point, there really is no need to say anything else.[00:24:20]

[00:24:30] Dr. John Vervaeke: Why don't we now move, you just give me a brief overview of the steps, stages, and the roles [00:24:40] that electric entity logos.

[00:24:42] Christopher Mastropietro: So for a fuller account of these. Uh, episodes 10 A and B of the series, specifically 10 B, contains a pretty lengthy set of instructions. Not only the instructions about the, about the process, but also sort of a foregrounding context of what it's doing and what are the [00:25:00] moves that are being made in each of the steps.

[00:25:02] Christopher Mastropietro: So I would just refer people to that. Much more comprehensive. This is just a quick overview. There are. Four rules and four steps. The rules are the proposer, in this case, John, the listener, in this case, Taylor, the scribe, in this case, Guy, the herald, in this case, myself, [00:25:20] to begin with. And then it's going to rotate every turn.

[00:25:24] Christopher Mastropietro: We're going to start with a proposal. That proposal is going to build as it moves from person to person. We're going to stay on the same virtue, in this case, dialectic. Uh, we're not going to change up the virtue as we move from person to person. The idea is that it gathers together. Each person takes what's been given.

[00:25:39] Christopher Mastropietro: [00:25:40] Uses it, reformulates it, builds on it, and moves it forward, right? Compounding exercise. So, the first stage is called, um, amplification. The proposer makes a proposal to the listener. The listener will try to induce the proposal. To draw it out, ask questions, make inquiries, [00:26:00] try and help the proposer to draw it out.

[00:26:03] Christopher Mastropietro: And they're really going to be working together on that, and that's just both with the questions and the propositions, but also with gesture, all kinds of non verbal cues. Everything we have at our disposal is used in that process to draw that proposal out. That's the amplification. Then we have the [00:26:20] appreciation.

[00:26:20] Christopher Mastropietro: The appreciation is basically the listener having taken everything in, having helped to stretch and draw and need the proposal, and will then appreciate it, in both senses of the term appreciation, to really acknowledge what is novel or interesting or insightful or striking about what they've just heard.

[00:26:38] Christopher Mastropietro: But also to appreciate [00:26:40] it in the sense of maybe to graduate it a little bit, maybe to lift it, maybe to add in reformulating it or in paraphrasing it and being more idiosyncratic about their formulation of it. Maybe something will be added that actually wasn't there in the first instance, so it's being appreciated.

[00:26:56] Christopher Mastropietro: The third, which can really occur at any time, is [00:27:00] a poria. Poria being a moment in the process where maybe we're at an impasse, something is trying to be said that can't really be said, maybe there's a miscommunication, maybe we're not quite getting it, or maybe we've actually reached a point where there's been a great insight, or something very striking, we actually just need to stop and pause on it, take it in, [00:27:20] dwell on it for a moment, and let it sit in the margins.

[00:27:23] Christopher Mastropietro: That can come at any time. And then the fourth stage is the anticipation. Anticipation comes when the listener, having done the amplification, having done the appreciation, then calls into question what's been proposed. [00:27:40] Maybe there are ways in which it's not exactly right. Maybe there's more to the story.

[00:27:44] Christopher Mastropietro: Maybe it's not sufficient and it won't be, so there will always be something to anticipate about it. What hasn't been said that should be. What missing ingredient will help us Advance the story and keep it moving. Now, the roles of the [00:28:00] scribe and the herald. The scribe is keeping track of the proposal. As it gets reformulated, the scribe is noting it, writing it down.

[00:28:07] Christopher Mastropietro: In this case, we have a pad and paper. You can also do it from memory. It depends. Um, but the scribe is basically keeping track of the letter of the proposal, right? Not every single word that's said, but every time as the proposal is reformulated, the [00:28:20] scribe is keeping track, because the rest of us are bound to forget at some point in time.

[00:28:24] Christopher Mastropietro: Before, uh, the listener moves into appreciation, after they've finished amplifying and drawing out the proposal, the scribe will chime in. And reiterate what the proposal has been, just to make sure that we're all on the same page and we're actually appreciating the [00:28:40] same thing, just so that we're all coherent together.

[00:28:43] Christopher Mastropietro: And then the Herald, the Herald is doing something similar to the scribe except for everything that is not said right? This Herald is noticing what's actually happening between the two people, between the listener and the proposer. What kind of relationship is actually being called into effect, right?

[00:28:57] Christopher Mastropietro: What's passing back and forth between. [00:29:00] In all of the things that aren't being said, right, what, what, how is, how is the virtue? That is being induced and called into question. What effect is that actually having on the two people and their relationship in the moment? And then how is that progressing as we go along?

[00:29:15] Christopher Mastropietro: That's the herald. So the herald and the scribe are basically kind of picking up on two different [00:29:20] aspects of what's going on, but they're just looking through very different kinds of telescopes.

[00:29:25] Dr. John Vervaeke: And they both speak to the listener after appreciation and before anticipation.

[00:29:35] Christopher Mastropietro: After appreciation, before anticipation. And so then the rules switch, right? The, uh, [00:29:40] the listener becomes the proposer, the scribe becomes the listener, the herald becomes the scribe, and, um, the proposer becomes the herald. Right.

[00:29:49] Dr. John Vervaeke: We'll do one round of that, and then we'll go into some free form.

[00:29:57] Dr. John Vervaeke: Proposer.[00:30:00]

[00:30:05] Dr. John Vervaeke: I propose that the virtue of dialectic is the cultivated capacity to orient and to track [00:30:20] how what in Dialogos is beyond what is normally found in dialogue, that that's a virtue that helps us track that in Dialogos, which is, which exceeds everyday. Dialogue. So, the following kinds of things. I just want [00:30:40] to quickly summarize

[00:30:42] Guy Sengstock: that, I got all that.

[00:30:43] Guy Sengstock: Yes. The virtue of the dialectic is the, um, Capacity. The capacity.

[00:30:54] Dr. John Vervaeke: To orient and track that which in dialogos exceeds [00:31:00] the everyday sense of dialogue.

[00:31:05] Dr. John Vervaeke: And in that sense, to be oriented on to the logos, orienting and tracking it.

[00:31:18] Dr. John Vervaeke: So specifically, [00:31:20] I think we're talking about things like that. Unlike in dialogue and Dialogos, there's a reciprocal and shared flow state there within that there's an intent to presence, a we [00:31:40] presence. Above and beyond a you and I presence,

[00:31:46] Dr. John Vervaeke: there's a sense of moving beyond what's in normal dialogue of my autobiography and your autobiography and what's [00:32:00] negotiated between them into something beyond both of us.

[00:32:07] Dr. John Vervaeke: That there's an orientation on the how and the making sense, not just the what, that is the focal point of the dialogue. [00:32:20] And that there is the proper aspiration to actually exemplify and thereby begin to cultivate a particular virtue. And none of these are typically present in what is meant by everyday dialogue.

[00:32:37] Dr. John Vervaeke: And all of that constellation, [00:32:40] the virtue of dialectic. It's the capacity we create through the practice that allows us to say, there it is properly orient towards it so that we can navigate and track it.

[00:32:55] Taylor Barrett: And the it being the logos.

[00:32:57] Dr. John Vervaeke: Yes, exactly. Yeah. And I've tried it and I'm [00:33:00] not giving a definition of the logos.

[00:33:01] Dr. John Vervaeke: I'm giving some criteria by which we can mark its presence because the defining of it would be actually to undermine. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So,

[00:33:12] Taylor Barrett: I mean, I think you sort of simply said it at the beginning. It's sort of this, this function of tracking [00:33:20] the logos that is, and that is the defining feature is what I'm hearing of dialectic that is not present in everyday dialogue.

[00:33:30] Taylor Barrett: Yes. Yeah. Yeah.

[00:33:32] Dr. John Vervaeke: So I'm trying to say that, um, there are many, many different ways. Among many [00:33:40] dimensions in which we're modifying how we're orienting, how we're taking up our own identities, what we're trying to achieve and an emphasis on the how of making sense as opposed to the sense being made. Like there's this constellation that I'm [00:34:00] trying to, I'm trying to get at.

[00:34:02] Dr. John Vervaeke: And that, and that. And these are all features. These are all features. And so, because of what I want, I want to say is the proper virtue of dialectic is to orient and track the logos so that you can appropriately follow [00:34:20] it and afford how it will unfold for itself. For itself. Yes. Hmm. Can you say that another way?

[00:34:33] Dr. John Vervaeke: I want the virtue makes me desirous [00:34:40] that the logos take on a life of its own such that it can challenge me to go to places that are not comfortable and so that I often need to instantiate the very virtue that's in the [00:35:00] practice in order to follow the logos. And again, this is a very deep difference from dialogue in which we typically, even when we're disagreeing, we are in.

[00:35:07] Dr. John Vervaeke: Autobiographical positions of comfort and we're trying to make a point or convince somebody. Yeah.

[00:35:14] Taylor Barrett: Yeah. That sounds like another defining feature too is sort of it's, we're not trying to convince [00:35:20] like we would in normal everyday

[00:35:21] Dr. John Vervaeke: dialogue. Oh, right. Right. Very good. Yes. There, there can be argumentation.

[00:35:27] Dr. John Vervaeke: But, but, but the virtue is not the attempt to convince, but to coordinate what is emerging from you and I such [00:35:40] that we can both orient onto the logos and how it is helping us engage with the virtue. Yeah.

[00:35:50] Guy Sengstock: That's a lot.

[00:35:55] Guy Sengstock: Um,

[00:35:56] Dr. John Vervaeke: yeah. So I have one other dimension too. Oh. Okay. [00:36:00] All right. Well, and this, and this is because I think dialectic is a virtue of virtues that what it is, is dialectic is also the virtue that allows us to come into communion with the logos [00:36:20] such that it can guide us about how we can understand, cultivate, and internalize particular virtues and how they are related together.

[00:36:30] Taylor Barrett: Yes. And, and that, how they're related together, you also see in the

[00:36:34] Dr. John Vervaeke: dialectic. Yes. I think dialectic insofar as the dialectic is the [00:36:40] incarnating, the presence of the logos as I've described it, the way it exceeds dialogue, the, the, the logos, uh, right. Is disclose is, I'm trying to say something, it's disclosing to us.

[00:36:55] Dr. John Vervaeke: It's not just any individual virtue, but how the virtues all [00:37:00] interpenetrate almost like in a holographic manner.

[00:37:03] Taylor Barrett: It's almost like the, the logos of the virtue and then the logos of the, we call it the

[00:37:09] Dr. John Vervaeke: many. Yes. Yes. Yes. That's good. I like that. And so

[00:37:18] Dr. John Vervaeke: I'm now cognizant of the fact that this [00:37:20] is kind of a backwards step proposal. I was going to say definition, it's not definition backwards proposal because what I've done is saying what it is. The virtue affords us to do, but I haven't spoken towards what the virtue, the virtue, like what [00:37:40] the phenomenology of the virtue is, how I, what it's like to inhabit that.

[00:37:47] Dr. John Vervaeke: So in addition to that, the ability to orient and track all the dimensionality of the logos that is above and beyond everyday dialogue.[00:38:00]

[00:38:00] Dr. John Vervaeke: There's something about the virtue that is a way in which I come into question myself and I'm, I'm being, I'm, I'm being examined. It's a self examination in which I'm, I'm being examined by the logos and not just autobiographical. Yes. It's like [00:38:20] reciprocal. Yeah, yeah. Yes. Yes. Yeah, like that. Whew. Okay. Yeah, I think my proposal stunt

[00:38:32] Guy Sengstock: Would you like me to read the initial proposal and see if that still fits? Yes. Okay. The virtue of [00:38:40] dialectic is the capacity to orient and teach that track TR and, I'm sorry. Yeah, track that. In dialogues that exceeds an everyday dialogue.

[00:38:57] Dr. John Vervaeke: And what I would add to that is just some of the [00:39:00] dimensions that have been drawn out, and also not just sort of the telogy of the virtue, what it's aiming at, but also the experience of the virtue is this experience of being examined.

[00:39:14] Dr. John Vervaeke: It's, it's, it's semi autonomous. I, I, it's not like I'm not involved, but I'm being, there's a self examination, [00:39:20] which I'm being examined by the logos. And that is part and parcel of being able to participate. That's what I, that's what, that's what. Okay. Got you. Okay. Uh,

[00:39:34] Taylor Barrett: appreciation. Um, Oh, that's right. The Herald.

[00:39:39] Taylor Barrett: Yeah. Right. We need the Herald. [00:39:40] Um,

[00:39:40] Christopher Mastropietro: uh, there's something quite funny going on here. , which is that I, there's this real sense of seriousness about this one. Sometimes when a proposal is made about a virtue, we can just sort of throw it out mm-hmm. And see what happens. Mm. And I sense in this case, because of this, the, the stakes right.

[00:39:59] Christopher Mastropietro: This, there's a set of [00:40:00] stakes on this one that weren't, that isn't true of the other ones. Mm-hmm. Right. Because we're, because we're proposing at the very thing that we're doing, weighs very heavily on the proposal. Hmm. And the volume and girth of the proposal. Which I sense Taylor is just trying to cling to, [00:40:20] lest it crush us off, has something to do with those stakes, and the heaviness of those stakes, and there's a lot of care, and a meticulousness, and I can, I can feel a heaviness of it, as you, you're

[00:40:33] Guy Sengstock: both talking, especially as you're...

[00:40:36] Guy Sengstock: Mm hmm,

[00:40:37] Dr. John Vervaeke: mm hmm, mm hmm, that's really

[00:40:39] Taylor Barrett: [00:40:40] good. Yeah, I appreciate the, um, the multifaceted attention that you have on the proposal of sort of like there's this, there's what it is or how it occurs to you. And then there's the sort of the defining features of it. And there's also [00:41:00] the phenomenological experience of engaging with that particular virtue.

[00:41:06] Taylor Barrett: Um, so it feels in so many ways, like, comprehensive in it, like, checks off so many boxes of my understanding as well. So it's just like, everything's like,

[00:41:16] Guy Sengstock: yes, yes, yes,

[00:41:18] Taylor Barrett: yes. [00:41:20] Um, yeah, I think that's, that's where I'm left with it. Yeah. Oh, anticipation. Oh my God. Um, I feel playful. It's like, what's left? Um, you know, sort of reflecting the girth of the proposal, um, I am thinking a bit more [00:41:40] of, you know, maybe in that area of, and I guess I should be probably anticipating more towards you.

[00:41:47] Taylor Barrett: Um, I'm thinking there's something maybe still mysterious here about the experience of the engagement in the dialectic and how that would be [00:42:00] different. So maybe picking up a bit on John's You know, more of the reciprocal, um, seeing in, uh, perspective, I think that could be expanded

[00:42:12] Guy Sengstock: upon. Mm hmm. And, and engagement.

[00:42:15] Guy Sengstock: You mean the engagement with the people in the... Or [00:42:20] with the

[00:42:20] Taylor Barrett: virtue or, well, I think I was thinking more from sort of the individual participation. So sort of the, the participatory experience of, of engaging in dialectic, I think there might be more there to explore. Um, what else seems mysterious to me?[00:42:40]

[00:42:44] Taylor Barrett: I think I noticed more of a gravitation to that area. That feels import. So that's probably where my proposals come from. Great. Yeah. Hmm. [00:43:00] Okay. So, so picking up on everything that John said, I feel no interest to modify any of it. And I would propose. The experience of engaging in dialectic [00:43:20] calls upon a

[00:43:24] Guy Sengstock: vulnerability.

[00:43:24] Guy Sengstock: The experience of engaging in dialectic calls upon a

[00:43:29] Taylor Barrett: vulnerability. It calls upon other virtues, actually. It

[00:43:33] Christopher Mastropietro: calls upon other virtues, actually.

[00:43:35] Taylor Barrett: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I think I'm noticing something about that. Yeah. [00:43:40] Courage needs to be online. Um, humility needs to be online. Yeah. Um, what can we call it? Like openness, um, receptivity.

[00:43:57] Taylor Barrett: Yeah. It's, it's, it seems like it [00:44:00] calls upon so many virtuous foundational capacities to fully engage in the

[00:44:07] Christopher Mastropietro: dialectic.

[00:44:07] Guy Sengstock: Yeah. So all these capacities, right. You're seeing, it calls on all of them to fully engage. So engagement, is it linked to all these capacities? [00:44:20] Or all these capacities, are they the, are they the means of engagement or are they what call forth the engagement or,

[00:44:28] Taylor Barrett: well, I think some of them call forth the engagement.

[00:44:30] Taylor Barrett: I think probably the courage, so the courage is probably the one virtue that would call on the engagement. And yet to, to do it, to [00:44:40] allow the thing that John's talking about to sort of be examined, the humility probably has to be there. Otherwise it's being blocked in some way. Um, same thing maybe with the openness.

[00:44:51] Taylor Barrett: Yeah. So something, whatever, you know, the virtues that make me more receptive, more open. Right. Uh, allow me to more fully engage in [00:45:00] the, in the process, whereas if those are, uh, less defined or, or of a lower capacity, they will create, uh, maybe bottlenecks in the dialectic. Yeah. Yeah. I like that. Tell me what that

[00:45:14] Christopher Mastropietro: feels.

[00:45:14] Christopher Mastropietro: Right.

[00:45:15] Guy Sengstock: Great. If, if you just sit with that feeling of right. Hmm. [00:45:20] And if, if we ask ourselves, are you engaged, are you in the engagement and that feeling of right? Is that, are those two connected right

[00:45:32] Christopher Mastropietro: now? I like,[00:45:40]

[00:45:40] Christopher Mastropietro: Hmm. Yeah.

[00:45:42] Guy Sengstock: Yeah. Which is, which is tapping right

[00:45:44] Dr. John Vervaeke: there.

[00:45:45] Taylor Barrett: It's just something like felt more solid. This is, I don't know why this is the motion, but this is the motion.

[00:45:51] Guy Sengstock: Yeah. Well, you looked up there and then you went like that kind of in that direction. You said something feels more solid.

[00:45:58] Taylor Barrett: Yeah. Yeah. [00:46:00] Yeah. I don't know quite how it articulated other than it seems.

[00:46:05] Taylor Barrett: I mean, I'm silly. What am I doing? Yeah. Um, but I'm like trusting like something like landed, like it came in and it, it, like the answer

[00:46:14] Guy Sengstock: was yes. See, so from there. A question. Hmm. What is [00:46:20] dialectic?

[00:46:28] Taylor Barrett: Well, now I notice I want to bring in John's proposal.

[00:46:34] Guy Sengstock: Do you want

[00:46:35] Taylor Barrett: it read? No, no. It's something more like, maybe I'll use slightly [00:46:40] different words that fit more with this moment. It's almost like, um, yes, there's a following, but it's like a trust. Like I'm engaging, like my following isn't like, um, trepidatious or cautious.

[00:46:55] Taylor Barrett: Um, it isn't even necessarily that full of [00:47:00] curiosity. It's almost feels like a calling, almost like a flavor of like a deep trust. Yeah. Maybe that's the connection to the right.

[00:47:10] Guy Sengstock: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So you just noticed. That actually part of what has you follow where the logos takes you, [00:47:20] right, is a trust.

[00:47:21] Guy Sengstock: Yes. And you said something interesting. It's not even necessarily curiosity, right? That's like an

[00:47:27] Taylor Barrett: insight. Yeah. Something about that seems, um, counter in some way, like, Oh, that shouldn't be there. Yeah. Yeah. Something

[00:47:35] Guy Sengstock: about that feels right. And if it's there right now, that trust, [00:47:40] if it were to just. Feel the trust.

[00:47:43] Guy Sengstock: I'm mostly asking the trust. What is the trust in relationship with?

[00:47:53] Guy Sengstock: How does it know

[00:47:53] Christopher Mastropietro: to be trust?[00:48:00]

[00:48:00] Taylor Barrett: I like the question. I don't know if I have the answer.

[00:48:06] Taylor Barrett: I can feel something here in my body. Like this is where the sensation is.

[00:48:10] Guy Sengstock: Yeah. Yeah, right here is where the sensation

[00:48:12] Taylor Barrett: is. Yeah, something like it came online when

[00:48:15] Guy Sengstock: you asked the question. Yeah. And is it like the, the sensation? Is it the, is it the [00:48:20] sensation letting you know that you trust? Or is it telling you to trust?

[00:48:24] Taylor Barrett: I think it's something like the relationship, like the question, what's it in relationship to? Yeah. It seems

[00:48:32] Guy Sengstock: to be here. Right

[00:48:33] Christopher Mastropietro: here. Yes. Yes. Yeah.

[00:48:34] Taylor Barrett: Yeah.

[00:48:38] Taylor Barrett: Yeah. Yeah. [00:48:40] And there's like a wonder to it. It's like, and I, I don't know how to make sense of it.

[00:48:44] Guy Sengstock: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You don't seem to be anxious about not knowing how to make sense of it. No. How come, uh,

[00:48:53] Taylor Barrett: is that the easy answer is that's the trust we start getting

[00:48:57] Guy Sengstock: a little bit cynical here. So we're, the [00:49:00] hermeneutic circle started.

[00:49:01] Guy Sengstock: Yeah.

[00:49:04] Taylor Barrett: Yeah,

[00:49:07] Taylor Barrett: I maybe it is the absence of contraction. It is the recognition of openness, the recognition of okayness. Yeah. The idea of rightness. Yeah. That all that is [00:49:20] like, I feel relaxed. Yeah. Yeah. And in this place. Yes. It's a yes.

[00:49:25] Guy Sengstock: Yes.

[00:49:29] Guy Sengstock: So I have a question for you. What is dialectic[00:49:40]

[00:49:40] Guy Sengstock: and would you like to hear the current iteration of it?

[00:49:48] Taylor Barrett: No.

[00:49:53] Taylor Barrett: And yeah. That's interesting. It's like, I'm out of words, [00:50:00] like a more, I could repeat myself and that would still feel true. And yet it seems slightly

[00:50:04] Guy Sengstock: insufficient. Yeah. What if we just allow the, allow that no word and maybe consider it an aporia. Let's give that a moment or a space.[00:50:20]

[00:50:22] Guy Sengstock: I noticed being with you in this aporia or this space of silence. It's, I feel very solid, but I also feel like I'm dissolving at the edges, right? Like we could just dissolve the other or

[00:50:35] Christopher Mastropietro: something. Yeah.[00:50:40]

[00:50:45] Taylor Barrett: I don't think language exists here.

[00:50:53] Taylor Barrett: Yeah. It's like a faculty is failing or not working [00:51:00] and yet it doesn't feel like confusion. I mean, I'm more confused about the state. Yeah. But not about the idea of there being a something to add or a new answer to

[00:51:14] Guy Sengstock: what is dialectic. Yeah.

[00:51:16] Christopher Mastropietro: Which is?[00:51:20]

[00:51:33] Taylor Barrett: Yeah.

[00:51:37] Taylor Barrett: Nothing. I would just go back to [00:51:40] trust.

[00:51:42] Guy Sengstock: Trust. Yeah. Okay. Great. Is that, do you feel complete?

[00:51:50] Taylor Barrett: I feel like, yeah, there's nothing else that I think I can add, especially in this place that I'm in right now.

[00:51:57] Guy Sengstock: Great. Do you feel I understood [00:52:00] you? Do you feel understood?

[00:52:06] Guy Sengstock: Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Great. Sweet. Thank you. So I will go into appreciation or, or

[00:52:16] Dr. John Vervaeke: just appreciation and then describing the Herald.

[00:52:19] Guy Sengstock: Yeah. [00:52:20] Yeah. I'm appreciation. Just the, the, the couple of things, John's is, as you mentioned, the seriousness of it, right. And the articulation of John. And then, then this went into a very, almost a nonverbal kind of [00:52:40] place that was very simply about trust, which is really interesting to me.

[00:52:45] Guy Sengstock: And that. It was also really interesting to me and I appreciated the contentment was staying there. Like I could have easily imagined that being an anxious experience or something like that, but it [00:53:00] wasn't. Um, and I think what's, yeah, there's my appreciation. Yeah. Yeah.

[00:53:10] Dr. John Vervaeke: Okay. So scribe and then

[00:53:11] Christopher Mastropietro: Harold. So carrying a little bit over from John, the definition, so the proposal, excuse me, that we have is that [00:53:20] dialectic is a following the logos, but understood as a deep trust of the logos, A trust that calls upon the other virtues as fundamental capacities.

[00:53:32] Christopher Mastropietro: Hmm

[00:53:33] Guy Sengstock: hmm.

[00:53:34] Dr. John Vervaeke: Yeah. Great. So is Harold. I saw [00:53:40] and felt this shift, um, and it was definitely a sort of head to heart shift. Um, and then I also found a slowing down of how things, [00:54:00] uh, were unpacking. And so there was more of the articulation by like, by, by, by putting space between things that was really, um, really present.

[00:54:16] Dr. John Vervaeke: That's what I saw as the herald. Great. [00:54:20]

[00:54:22] Guy Sengstock: Can you read that one more? Oh, or whoever the scribe is. I just want that read to me one more time.

[00:54:27] Christopher Mastropietro: So the proposal is right now that dialectic is the following of the logos, but as a deep trust. In the logos, a trust that calls upon the other virtues as [00:54:40] fundamental capacities.

[00:54:41] Guy Sengstock: Right, right. One more time. The beginning of especially the

[00:54:47] Christopher Mastropietro: proposal is that dialectic is the following of the logos. Let's see. Yes. But as the deep trust or in deep trust, yes, of the logos. Yes. A trust that [00:55:00] calls upon the other virtues. Yes. As fundamental capacities. Okay. Great.

[00:55:06] Guy Sengstock: What's what's. Thank you.

[00:55:08] Guy Sengstock: Thank you. The question I have, what's mysterious to me is, so there's the following of the logos, right? And everything comes out of the following of the logos. [00:55:20] Um, you're the listener, right? Right. Um,

[00:55:25] Christopher Mastropietro: are you about to make a proposal? You're still anticipating? He's

[00:55:27] Dr. John Vervaeke: still in the

[00:55:27] Guy Sengstock: anticipation. Yeah. So the, the sense is I get it.

[00:55:33] Guy Sengstock: So, so far I really, I, I get the, that it's about following the logos, [00:55:40] right? And that there's something about, something about. When you come in contact with the Logos in dialectic, that there's some, there's some kind of trust that seems participatory, embodied, and that we both experienced in that. That seems to be one of the [00:56:00] ways that the Logos actually speaks in that way that affords the following.

[00:56:08] Guy Sengstock: I think what I'm anticipating is. There's something in, there's something in dialectic that seems to already announce[00:56:20]

[00:56:23] Guy Sengstock: that there's a, there's some way that the logos speaks in the inclination to do dialectic at all. There's some way that it's present in some way. I'm interested in how, what that is, [00:56:40] how I hear it. There's something, there's something like that. So I think I want to go into that. Okay. Okay, cool.

[00:56:53] Guy Sengstock: I'm just curious what you've, you've heard so far, if you've heard anything.[00:57:00]

[00:57:02] Guy Sengstock: Got it. So I want to talk this, this through a little bit. So when I think about dialectic, right, dialectic is in using Heraclitus's, um, uh, metaphor symbols of the log and the [00:57:20] proposals being something like the log of a fire, right? And a log is, you could say, Is, is, is, well, it's literally stored light, right?

[00:57:31] Guy Sengstock: But it's, it's in a form and that the dialectic, right, is you can imagine is the rubbing together [00:57:40] or the interaction of the propositions or the logs. And at some point it lights. I, it's mysterious to me where the logos is in the log, right? And how, how dialectic actually does the rubbing. It actually allows the living logos to come [00:58:00] alive that we, then we then catch and we trust and we go into it because it seems that.

[00:58:07] Guy Sengstock: There's something about dialectic and looking at the difference between dialectic and say dialogue

[00:58:13] Christopher Mastropietro: that, that possibility

[00:58:15] Guy Sengstock: of dialogos, right, it catching on fire [00:58:20] seems to be present from the start in some way. Right. And I want to know what that way that is present. Do we hear it? Do we, do we, is there something about the four, the formality of making a proposal?

[00:58:37] Guy Sengstock: That. Already [00:58:40] announces that the proposal is going to be, there's something more than itself, right? That is contained. And because there's some way that it seems like the dialectic is the following of precisely what the proposal doesn't say, right?

[00:58:58] Christopher Mastropietro: Dialectic is the [00:59:00] following of what the proposal doesn't say.

[00:59:02] Christopher Mastropietro: Yeah. I'm going to say that dialectic is the following of what the proposal doesn't say.

[00:59:08] Guy Sengstock: Is that your proposal? Sounds like it is.

[00:59:13] Christopher Mastropietro: Yes. Dialectic is the following, not, I'm getting this, I [00:59:20] don't, I, I, I understand you not to mean it's. It's the thing that comes after by the following, but it's the action of following.

[00:59:29] Christopher Mastropietro: Yes. Yes. And the way that it's after Socrates of following Socrates. Yes. Right. Because

[00:59:34] Guy Sengstock: otherwise there'd be no reason to engage. Right. Right. If, if the, [00:59:40] if the proposal basically like just said the logos, there'd be no reason to engage with it. There's something about the way that the proposal. I don't know, I want to say holes, the logos, but also.

[00:59:59] Guy Sengstock: Points to [01:00:00] or speaks to what it doesn't say, right? Which is that there's a sense of more. So, so the logo, so the proposition doesn't fully say the whole thing. Right. Right. Thus, thus, there's.

[01:00:16] Dr. John Vervaeke: I just want to make sure I've got the proposal. Dialectic [01:00:20] is the virtue of following what the proposal does not say.

[01:00:24] Dr. John Vervaeke: Is that, is that? Yes. Is that a fair representation? Yes. Sorry for interrupting, but it was, it was introduced a little indirectly. So I just wanted to make

[01:00:31] Christopher Mastropietro: sure I got it. Yes. Okay. This is very interesting. Dialectic is the following of what the proposal doesn't say. Okay. So I get the sense when you say [01:00:40] that.

[01:00:40] Christopher Mastropietro: that you take the following of what the proposal doesn't say to be in the direction of what the proposal means. Mm-hmm. . Mm-hmm. not wayward in some direction. Yeah. That is not meant, yes. Yes. Right. So for instance, let me just maybe give an example, right? If [01:01:00] dialectic is following what the proposal doesn't say, if you were to make a proposal and I heard the proposal, And the proposal provoked in me a memory that took me away from this conversation and threw me off into a completely different direction.

[01:01:18] Christopher Mastropietro: I would be following what [01:01:20] the proposal didn't say. , but I guess that's not the kind of Yes. Following that you meet. Yes. So do you mean that the following of what the proposal doesn't say still has to tie itself Yes. To where the proposal is intended? Yes.

[01:01:35] Guy Sengstock: Yes. It's like the proposal points. [01:01:40] Oh,

[01:01:41] Christopher Mastropietro: okay.

[01:01:43] Guy Sengstock: To what is beyond the proposal.

[01:01:45] Guy Sengstock: So you would have to, you'd have to get trigger. And then go towards the direction of the pointing, right, for it to be following it. Okay. Yes.

[01:01:55] Christopher Mastropietro: Okay. Okay. So, okay. So just like right [01:02:00] now. So if this

[01:02:01] Guy Sengstock: is what you're actually right now, like, so you're following. The proposal. Right.

[01:02:06] Christopher Mastropietro: Right. Right. Because, because, because you, when you made the proposal that dialectic follows a proposal that the proposal doesn't say, I had a sense of where the proposal was going.

[01:02:17] Christopher Mastropietro: And I gave you an example of me following the [01:02:20] letter of the proposal. But I knew, I knew intuitively that that's not where I was going. Right? Yes. So you're saying that the instance of what just happened between us is actually an instance of the dialectic? Yes. Because I was tracking your meaning? Yes. By avoiding tracking the letter?

[01:02:36] Christopher Mastropietro: Yes. Right.

[01:02:38] Guy Sengstock: But you, just [01:02:40] like, however, The letter matters, right?

[01:02:44] Christopher Mastropietro: So it's like, just like with the log, when the

[01:02:47] Guy Sengstock: log catches fire, the fire, on one level, it's transforming the log, but it's doing it precisely in the contours of the log. Right? Okay. So that [01:03:00] transformation. So following the log is

[01:03:02] Christopher Mastropietro: really important.

[01:03:03] Christopher Mastropietro: Okay. Okay. So if the log is the proposal, in order for me to follow what the proposal doesn't say in the way that I would need to, to follow the proposal, the proposal would have to be made in such a way that it [01:03:20] had a shape that was followable. Yeah. Can I put it that way? Yes. Yes. Right. The fire would have to be able to catch along the lines of the proposal so that it could burn through.

[01:03:29] Christopher Mastropietro: Yes. In other words, it couldn't be wet wood. Yes. Right? Yes. It had, would have to have, it would have to be able to conduct. Yes. Yes. Okay. [01:03:40] What is the difference between a proposal that I can follow so that it burns through and a proposal that I can't follow because it might not. I have the sense like, I know there's a difference.

[01:03:58] Christopher Mastropietro: Yeah. [01:04:00] But I can't, I couldn't tell you what that difference is. Yeah. What does, what does that difference feel like? The question

[01:04:06] Guy Sengstock: is like, there's a proposal that we can follow through, right? That burns along the, the, the contours of the proposition or the log. And then what happens when the proposal doesn't [01:04:20] burn through?

[01:04:20] Guy Sengstock: Well, I think it's, it's so interesting. It's like we can hear that it doesn't. Right. In some way. So there's something about there's this, this is

[01:04:33] Christopher Mastropietro: where it goes back to is it goes,

[01:04:36] Guy Sengstock: it goes, it's, it's, would you pre read the proposal again? [01:04:40] The

[01:04:40] Dr. John Vervaeke: right. You, the original proposal is dialectic is the virtue of following of what the proposal does not say.

[01:04:46] Dr. John Vervaeke: Yeah. Then you added to it. The proposal points to what is beyond the proposal. Yes. And then you added to this following the log while transforming the log is very

[01:04:56] Guy Sengstock: important. Yes, absolutely. Absolutely. So [01:05:00] if we're fine, I would imagine as we're, as you're following along and it doesn't say it. What are we in relationship to what, right?

[01:05:09] Guy Sengstock: It's like, there's some, something that tells us it's like, it reminds me of what we were talking about yesterday with air, right? This part where, oh yeah, it doesn't, the proposal doesn't [01:05:20] totally, doesn't totally say it. In fact, it's, in fact, it's saying everything that it isn't that negative, that negative space or that.

[01:05:31] Guy Sengstock: Putting skin on the ghost starts to happen, but I would say even in not being able to follow it tells us that there's something [01:05:40] not to follow. What is that thing to follow? That's, that's what kind of comes up in answering your question. Okay.

[01:05:47] Christopher Mastropietro: Boy, oh boy. Okay. Okay. I'm going to try and say that back to you.

[01:05:51] Christopher Mastropietro: Okay, great. Let's see if I, let's see if I got it. Good luck. Let's, thank you. Yes. Okay. So we start by saying the proposal, the dialectic is [01:06:00] following, do you need me to reread it? Yes, please.

[01:06:04] Dr. John Vervaeke: So dialectic is the virtue of following, uh, sorry, dialectic is the virtue of following what the proposal does not say.

[01:06:13] Dr. John Vervaeke: Do you need any of the other

[01:06:14] Christopher Mastropietro: things? No, I think I've got, thank you. So dialectic is, The virtue of following what the proposal [01:06:20] doesn't say, but that the proposal points to. Right. So it's not just following what it doesn't say. Yeah. It's, it's following what it doesn't say. So there's a, there's a, there's a negative proposal, right?

[01:06:34] Christopher Mastropietro: There's something to be avoided. Yes. So now I have, there's a boundary. I get the sense [01:06:40] like you need to somehow provide somewhere to avoid. Yeah. Yeah, so that I'm getting the sense that part of the dialectic is knowing where not to go. Yeah, and then knowing where not to go Then there's something else beside the knowing we're not to go.

[01:06:56] Christopher Mastropietro: Right? And those two things, like, I see them almost as [01:07:00] lanes. Yeah. So, dialectic is following what the proposal doesn't say. But, there's not just a negative index there, right? There's a negative index, right? What it doesn't say, but what it... But what it, I almost get the sense of shape, shapeliness of proposal is the thing that keeps coming to me, right?

[01:07:16] Christopher Mastropietro: When I think of the way that a fire traces along the log, it is the [01:07:20] shape of the log and its texture and its density and its properties. Shapeliness, figuration, geometry is what I think of, right? So is there's, it seems to me like when I hear what you're saying, of course, geometry bright brings Plato back into the mix.

[01:07:35] Christopher Mastropietro: And that's just seems intuitively to be onto something. So what I'm [01:07:40] hearing you say is something like what? It's not the, it's not the, the measurement of the proposal, but it's something about the geometry of the proposal that determines where it points and that the shape of that proposal. Cool. Actually, I think of, I think of the way that it, that [01:08:00] I, I'm imagining it coming to a point, right?

[01:08:02] Christopher Mastropietro: Fingers pointing at the moon, right? Like that old expression. Yes. Yeah. Right. Is that? Yes. Is that in the area? Yes. Okay. Okay.

[01:08:11] Guy Sengstock: Yeah. And it speaks, it speaks beyond itself. Oh, more lights up, right, right, because it lit, [01:08:20] right? More lights up, and then there's more to propose that won't quite say it, right, but points beyond it.

[01:08:28] Guy Sengstock: And this is. The following and all the things that you just said about the virtues coming in the trust, it starts to, I start to form with it and become shaped by it. Right.

[01:08:39] Christopher Mastropietro: We're following it. [01:08:40] Okay. Okay. So it's not, so there's a, so there's a sort of a difference. There's like a D a relational difference that I'm hearing that wasn't clear before.

[01:08:47] Christopher Mastropietro: Right. Because, okay, so we're following, we're following what it doesn't say, but it's not simply that we're following what it doesn't say because we're, we're, we're, we're actually, it's like. What it says is something that we could look at, [01:09:00] but where it points is something we have to travel through, right?

[01:09:05] Christopher Mastropietro: So we have to travel along the shape of the proposal to know where it points. We don't know where it points by hearing it. We know where it points by actually traversing it, right? So there's something embodied and active that our relationship [01:09:20] to the proposal in dialectic, yes, that dialectic has something to do with the way that we.

[01:09:24] Christopher Mastropietro: Interact with the proposal in a much more embodied manner. Yes. Something to pass through, not something to say. Absolutely. Okay. That's good. You feel, do you feel, uh, do you feel, I feel, I feel like we've grasped this together. I feel, I [01:09:40] feel like we pointed beyond it. We pointed beyond it. Okay. Okay. Would you like to read it one more time?

[01:09:48] Christopher Mastropietro: Well,

[01:09:48] Dr. John Vervaeke: if I'm doing the full thing, I should give you both the proposal and its progression. Please. Right. So the original proposal was, uh, dialectic is the virtue of following what the proposal [01:10:00] does not say. Second major move, the proposal points to what is beyond proposal. Uh, and then the log came in as a metaphor, following the log while transforming the log is very important.

[01:10:14] Dr. John Vervaeke: Uh, being told what not to follow tells us [01:10:20] what to follow. And then this came into, and I couldn't quite get like a literal statement, but I put in something like the geometry of the proposal and enacting it in some fashion.

[01:10:33] Christopher Mastropietro: Okay. Okay. That's helpful. So I think what I think is coming up [01:10:40] now, what, like when I'm appreciating is that That what seems to be gathering together is the idea that the diet, that whatever dialectic is and does, isn't that the following of the logos is something that is a, that, that, that following the logos is [01:11:00] not something that we train on just with our attention, but it's something that we have to pass through in our entirety, right?

[01:11:07] Christopher Mastropietro: The body of the individual actually travels through the dialectic. The dialectic isn't something that passes between us, but something that we pass through. Yeah. Or maybe

[01:11:18] Guy Sengstock: both at once. You just described [01:11:20] my whole relationship with Heidegger in my 20s. Okay.

[01:11:24] Dr. John Vervaeke: Don't forget also to listen to The Herald.

[01:11:28] Christopher Mastropietro: So, I'll just finish the appreciation first.

[01:11:31] Christopher Mastropietro: What I'm appreciating is that our relationship to the dialectic, almost as though we had a subject object relationship to the [01:11:40] dialectic, and we were all subjects beholding the dialectic as the object. That's an imperfect analogy, but just sort of stay with me. And that what I'm now getting a sense of is that it's actually closer to the reverse.

[01:11:51] Christopher Mastropietro: That we are had. By the dialectic, when the dialectic is actually taking effect, and that's what makes it [01:12:00] participatory, right? It's not something that we have in hand, but we are had in its hand. And the way that we follow the contours of a proposal suggests that it is hosting us, not the other way around, when we're surrendering ourselves to it properly.

[01:12:14] Christopher Mastropietro: Right? Yes. And so, so before I anticipate, maybe I'll ask the [01:12:20] Herald. Hmm.

[01:12:21] Taylor Barrett: Yeah, I mean, what I noticed that really stood out for me is... You know, guy originally sort of leaning in and you seem very pensive, like trying to sort of get, so I had this image after it was named that guy was really rubbing the logs together with you.

[01:12:37] Taylor Barrett: And then there was these moments in which, like, you came in and you [01:12:40] both sort of came alive, like, you were really in the dialectic, and I imagine that, that caught fire, like, the rubbing of the logs together. Those were those moments, but then there was a moment of, like, coming back and, like, a pause and, like, again, like, a contemplate, then a re engagement.

[01:12:55] Taylor Barrett: I kept seeing throughout this sort of this vision, you know, and that was very present is this [01:13:00] imagery of sort of these logs and the way in which they catch fire. And it seemed to be happening through your proposal in listening. Wonderful. Like this

[01:13:08] Christopher Mastropietro: really. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

[01:13:13] Christopher Mastropietro: So what I'm anticipating is here, but yet to be said. [01:13:20] Is the relational stance that makes the dialectic possible that makes the effecting of the dialectic possible because we've, we've like what we've been gathering together this, this sort of theory of this more sort of theoretical geometrical idea of what the dialectic is, right?

[01:13:38] Christopher Mastropietro: What's the relationship [01:13:40] between the dialect and the proposal and the way the proposal is used in the relationship between the proposal and the logos, right? The relation between the part that is the proposal to the whole that is the logos. And the sense that it has to bridge, and the sense that there's a continuity, but that continuity has to do with following the shapeliness of it and not the letter of its speech or semantic content.

[01:13:59] Christopher Mastropietro: And [01:14:00] I think that's all, like, that's all really, that's charged. That's excellent. The thing that I anticipate that's missing, though, is that it seems, because of the way that we're actually trying to enact it, that the relational stance that we're all actually demonstrating or trying to is actually essential to bridging it, to hooking it, to [01:14:20] catching it.

[01:14:20] Christopher Mastropietro: Right? The I vow that we've been talking about so much in the last couple of dialogues has to be brought now into the proposal, right? It's not something that I'm just doing in isolation. It's something that we're doing, but where is that in the proposal? So we have to add it. [01:14:40] Okay. You're going to make your

[01:14:42] Dr. John Vervaeke: proposal.

[01:14:43] Dr. John Vervaeke: Okay. So we're switching roles. You're now the scribe and you're now the Herald. Right.

[01:14:51] Christopher Mastropietro: So my proposal is that dialectic,

[01:14:59] Christopher Mastropietro: [01:15:00] dialectic is, I'm going to basically take what you've given me first, right? Dialectic is the following of a proposal, following the proposal, what the proposal does not say, but points us to. Dialectic is the following of a [01:15:20] proposal, not in what the proposal says. But in what the proposal points us to, such that, that proposal becomes a vow to us and we become a vow to it.

[01:15:38] Dr. John Vervaeke: And just to be [01:15:40] clear, that's the practice of dialectic and the virtue is the ability to do that. I'm trying to get where the virtue is. So the virtue, let me make sure I understand you. So The virtue of dialectic is following the logos and, uh, and following the, [01:16:00] the geometrical contours of the space opened up by the proposal.

[01:16:05] Dr. John Vervaeke: But what you're adding is such that an I, thou relationship now comes to exist with the proposal. Have I understood you correctly? You've understood me. Right. And when you were doing it, you were doing this, uh, what was happening

[01:16:18] Christopher Mastropietro: there? I think [01:16:20] it's, there's something about the relational contact. I think there's a couple of things happening here, right?

[01:16:25] Christopher Mastropietro: One is that There's a gesture of invitation and gratitude that is suggestive of the relation we have to have with the proposal itself. So you're enacting it. Yeah. Symbolically, almost. Right. As though, as though you're the proposal. [01:16:40] Right, right, right. Right? Right, right, right. And I'm, and I'm, I'm making sort of a, a, a, a, a, a gesture of thanks and invitation to you.

[01:16:47] Christopher Mastropietro: Almost namaste or something. Yeah. Right. Which is a gesture of coming to know you. Right. Right. Coming to understand you. Coming to realize that I don't yet know you, but need to and want to. Right. , if you are the proposal, [01:17:00] I don't yet know you, even though I've cast you out in front of me. Right, right, right, right.

[01:17:05] Christopher Mastropietro: So there's that. And I think there's also this just the sense of contact, contact, kind of social contact, relational contact

[01:17:11] Dr. John Vervaeke: with the proposal. So there's a contact this way and then there's an initial contact. But a kind of, not [01:17:20] ignorance, but but like almost like learned at ignorance. Yeah. Like a sense of okay.

[01:17:26] Dr. John Vervaeke: Con contact and there's contact. I'm trying to get at what, what's in the

[01:17:30] Christopher Mastropietro: I thou ing. You must do with the proposal what you do with a friend that you're coming to know. Right. That's why the proposal has to become a thou. Okay,

[01:17:37] Dr. John Vervaeke: so you're doing this. So what's this? What's,

[01:17:38] Guy Sengstock: what's

[01:17:38] Christopher Mastropietro: this? Repetition. [01:17:40] Repetition.

[01:17:40] Christopher Mastropietro: Repetition. Repetition in the sense of, of repetition in the sense of gathering together and exceeding. Gathering together and exceeding. Gathering together and exceeding. That's the repetition. So.

[01:17:54] Dr. John Vervaeke: And, and, and that is adding to the virtue, how, [01:18:00] like you've given me the mechanics. In what way is that more

[01:18:04] Christopher Mastropietro: virtuous?

[01:18:06] Christopher Mastropietro: Because it's a reciprocal opening. Ah, what I've

[01:18:09] Guy Sengstock: described. You did, you did that what I've, what I've

[01:18:11] Christopher Mastropietro: opened, yeah. Yeah. What I've described to you is a, is a reciprocal opening whereby the proposal, so, you know, you know, when you come to know somebody, what begins [01:18:20] to happen is that you are coming to know the person is also, you're coming to know.

[01:18:25] Christopher Mastropietro: In some sense, everything else as well, right, right, that when you create a reciprocally opening, I vow relationship with someone and their perspective becomes available to you as a means of contact with the world, the world itself comes into [01:18:40] perhaps incrementally and maybe even imperceptibly comes into clearer and clearer resolution because you're using not in a not in a purely instrumental sense, but you now gain access to the world around you.

[01:18:54] Christopher Mastropietro: in the care of that person's reach that you didn't have a moment before. So as [01:19:00] that person becomes more mysterious, and as your understanding of them exceeds the one that you had a moment before, more and more and more becomes available. Such is also true, I think, of the proposal in dialectic. Great.

[01:19:16] Dr. John Vervaeke: I'm hearing the thou side of the I thou, but you keep also drawing the [01:19:20] circle close to your chest.

[01:19:21] Dr. John Vervaeke: So what's the I side of the I thou in that? Transfiguration of the proposal into a now, now, because the I, thou, are always. We're like, they were reciprocally bound together. So how is the eye changing when the proposal is

[01:19:36] Christopher Mastropietro: vowing? Well, the eye becomes a vow to the, to the proposal, right? It's a [01:19:40] bi directional relationship.

[01:19:41] Christopher Mastropietro: So what does that mean? It means that as I, as I, as I deepen my understanding of the proposal, the proposal is, is a reflective surface, right? It means that I become known to myself in ways that I wasn't before because the ways that the proposal is expanding in its width and its breadth. It's also casting [01:20:00] my reflection in the same proportions.

[01:20:01] Christopher Mastropietro: It means like, as I reformulate the proposal and deepen it, I'm actually doing to myself what I'm doing to the proposal. In other, in one sense, I thou, I thou is always spoken

[01:20:14] Dr. John Vervaeke: together. Right. Okay. So I'm getting that. Can you now? Clarify how [01:20:20] that's integrated by what you were saying with Guy about, it's not so much we're doing the dialectic as it's

[01:20:26] Christopher Mastropietro: doing us.

[01:20:27] Christopher Mastropietro: Because once that process begins, the emergence of what we called the Geist out of that process, right? Which is the persona of the Logos as it faces us. Ah, right. [01:20:40] We are had, we come into its custody. Right. Into its carriage, right? Right. Or maybe the best way to say it is we come into its... Hair, right? And so it becomes the governor of the process.

[01:20:54] Christopher Mastropietro: And the virtue has something to do with giving oneself to the emergence of that process [01:21:00] and opening to it as

[01:21:01] Dr. John Vervaeke: it opens. So you did this, giving oneself to. Yeah.

[01:21:04] Christopher Mastropietro: Like what's, what's. There's, there's sort of an implied sacrifice

[01:21:07] Guy Sengstock: there. Yes. Yeah, yeah,

[01:21:08] Dr. John Vervaeke: yeah, yeah, yeah. Which is. Exactly,

[01:21:10] Guy Sengstock: exactly.

[01:21:11] Christopher Mastropietro: To you? I think so.

[01:21:12] Christopher Mastropietro: An offering up, right? An offering up. Offertory. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Something

[01:21:16] Dr. John Vervaeke: like that. And what's the nature of the offering? [01:21:20]

[01:21:21] Christopher Mastropietro: What's the nature of the offering? I think the nature of the offering is we are willing to give up. Whatever we have at our disposal that we can either cling to as the idea of ourselves [01:21:40] and the idea of what things are or the law, like a lot.

[01:21:45] Christopher Mastropietro: So, you know, I have an idea of, you know, myself and what kind of a person I am, and I have an idea of what the world is, and I have an idea of what's real and what's not, and I have a metaphysics and I, you know, I have all my beliefs. And they're very important to me, and I can do one of two things [01:22:00] with the ideas I have, right?

[01:22:01] Christopher Mastropietro: I can, I can kind of, they can, I, you know, I can, I can, I can understand them as being possessions of mine. As things that, by virtue of holding them to my chest, I remain myself. Or, I can offer them as logs to the fire. Ah. , which is [01:22:20] to say that when they burn through the process, I don't know what I'm going to be.

[01:22:23] Christopher Mastropietro: Right. It's like the aspirational, uh, right. Uh, trans, like a transformative experience that Ellie, Todd Paul talks about. Right? Yeah. I don't know what I'm going to be in the fumes that, that, that, that are emitted by the burning of, of those ideas and beliefs. But I'm surrendering myself to the transformative [01:22:40] experience and I'm drawn to the belief that it's worthwhile by the process of the Logos itself, right?

[01:22:45] Christopher Mastropietro: By

[01:22:45] Guy Sengstock: following it.

[01:22:47] Dr. John Vervaeke: And this sounds very, very far from dialogue. Yeah. Because most of them, I think we could go on forever. But do you feel that you've, you've, yes, yes. [01:23:00] And so I've understood you to, uh, bring in. This added dimension, what everybody else has said, but there's this transfiguration of the proposal, and there's an I Thou, the proposal becomes a Thou, and then I become a Thou in relationship to it, and that is [01:23:20] an offering of oneself and one's belief into the fire of the process.

[01:23:25] Dr. John Vervaeke: Have I understood you? You have. . Um,

[01:23:33] Dr. John Vervaeke: so here is, I'm, I'm going to do, uh, the appreciation and then we'll stop there because anything else would take us [01:23:40] back into the circle. Um, first of all, I wanna appreciate everything that everyone said. Mm-hmm. , but, and then the, and then I, what I particularly appreciated about what you did, Chris, is I had.

[01:23:55] Dr. John Vervaeke: Um, thought enough about the existential stance and how [01:24:00] integral a role it plays in the virtue of dialectic. I think that was a gem, an absolute gem, and I really appreciate that. I'm very grateful, uh, and I'm understanding the virtue, and thereby the practice much better, uh, because of that. So I deeply appreciate that, [01:24:20] um, and that's where we'll close here.

[01:24:23] Dr. John Vervaeke: What would happen, of course, is we'd get the report of. The scribe and the herald, I would then go into anticipation and then we would circle, but we're running out of time. Uh, and we're going to pick up on what we've given birth to about dialectic and the [01:24:40] deologos in the next episode, when we talk about why is it that so many people in so many places are generating these communities of these kinds of practice and seeking the cultivation of these kinds of virtue.

[01:24:55] Dr. John Vervaeke: So thank you very much, gentlemen. Thank you. Oh. Thank Thank you everyone [01:25:00] for your time

[01:25:00] Christopher Mastropietro: and attention. It seems to me that the choice that Plato made was to create a form of recorded dialogue, a form of rec, of a form of record that could undermine itself. Yes. Mm-hmm. and in undermining itself could create from itself a [01:25:20] process that people could participate in and symbolically work through.