John Dunn

John Dunn original writing
Book sales
Blog
Thought Pieces
Oxford to Cambridge
Archive
Links
Contact

Blog

Next Entry

Where the immanence?

Tuesday, 18 January 2022 at 21:32

A painting of the glory on Dr John Dunn. Daniel Gran's Glory of the Newborn Christ in Presence of God the Father and the Holy Spirit. Note how Adam and Eve are portrayed below, in chains.

Where the immanence?

With the Fall Adam was a subsumed into the forest, into Nature, Oneness, sub-humanness, into Ananke, into abstraction.

The second Adam, instead of objectifying, was objectified.

The objectified Christ was murdered, the saving Christ was resurrected.

The objectified Christ was crucified, the resurrected Christ lives on as living thought, active thought; a mystery beyond understanding, but revealed as living thought.

But active thought cannot be expressed other than as a thought objectified, i.e. made abstract.

What is thought before the Fall, i.e. the fall into abstraction?

Is immanence with the Logos an attempted expression of active thought?

And where is immanence lived, in Love?

He that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.’ (1 John 4:16)

I am brought back to a favourite quotation of mine made by Johann Angelus Silesius, 17th century priest and religious poet.

“I know that without me no God can live; were I brought to naught, he would of necessity have to give up the ghost.”


© John Dunn.

Pound and Evola

Monday, 17 January 2022 at 21:29

Pound by Gaudier on Dr John Dunn. Ezra Pound by Henri Gaudier-Brzeska

Pound and Evola

Today’s updates to the website include a reworking to the presentation of my reading of Massimo Scaligero’s The Logos and the New Mysteries.The need for this is largely due to a technical oversight which has removed the distinguishing italics from the quotations from the book, as well as other matters such as reduction in size and boldness of the sub-headings. This will be rectified over time. To date this has been done up to and including the reading entitled Perceiving beyond.

Two items have been transferred from the ‘Blog’ to the ‘Archive’.

The first, entitled Pound Analysis,is a collection of quotations from prose works by Ezra Pound that I used as headings to the parts of my book Renaissance: Counter-Renaissance. Why choose Pound? Well, for a start, he knew who the enemy was and is. Pound’s prose works were amongst some of the most insightful analyses of twentieth century global geopolitics, cutting to the core of what is the real block to mankind's struggle upward out of ignorance.

The second piece, entitled Supra-sensual power,to be transferred to the archive is a note on the thought of Julius Evola, in which I emphasised his view that “superiority is not based on power, but rather power is based on superiority”.


© John Dunn.

Unattainable transcendence

Sunday, 16 January 2022 at 21:35

Angelus Silesius on Dr John Dunn. Johann Angelus Silesius

Unattainable transcendence

The divine intention of the Logos for the thinking subject, i.e. the latter’s potential, has its potential moment in the original connectivity with the Logos. However, this moment is not the thinking subject’s reality, who loses this moment. The thinking subject thus loses the possibility of an essential reality, since it believes that thought relates to objects or phenomena outside itself, and not to its own shaping power. Thought fails to see within itself the relation with the Logos that is immediate to it. It transfers this relation outside of itself.

Do we not do the same to the Logos, i.e. to the oginatory principle itself?

The indispensable condition of understanding the Logos is that object be not detached from the subject and posited in itself, independent, in its unattainable transcendence.

As transcendent object it can only be effectively posited as object already thought and thereby it is shownto be immanent in the thinking, but considered abstractly in a way which separates it from the thinking itself. And then it is obvious thatwhat we find within the object is what we have put there.

So it is the separation of the Logos from the thinking subject that results in the objectivising, what I have described elsewhere as idolatry.

What we know commonly as the Logos and ourselves as the thinking subject consist of what we have put there.

The Logos and the thinking subject, i.e. me, are being thought of abstractly; and an abstract concept has no reality.

So where is the concrete reality?

It can only be in active thought.

But active thought cannot be expressed other than as a thought objectified, i.e. made abstract.

What is thought before the fall, i.e. the fall into abstraction?

Is immanence with the Logos an attempted expression of active thought?

I am brought back to a favourite quotation of mine made by
Johann Angelus Silesius, 17th century priest and religious poet.

“I know that without me no God can live; were I brought to naught, he would of necessity have to give up the ghost.”
© John Dunn.

Gnomic wanting

Saturday, 15 January 2022 at 11:00

Original sin on Dr John Dunn. Adam succumbs, Lucas Cranach the Elder, 1531

Gnomic wanting

Here I lay my reading of St Maximus’s thoughts over my reading of Massimo Scaligero. I find parallels between St Maximus’ natural and gnomic wills and Scaligero’s living and reflected thought.

‘Gnomic will’ is the ‘choosing will’ that originates in thought reflected back as material ‘reality’, that believes it can pick and choose its way through the seemingly ready-made material options laid out before it.

The‘natural will’ originates in the divine will of the Logos, which distinguishes the self from all other selves. The divine will incarnatesin the self as the living thought which shapes the world, unless lost as the ‘gnomic will’ of apparent material ‘reality’ .

‘Natural will’ follows the divine intention for its deification.

It is ‘gnomic will’ that needs salvation.

The Fall resulted in ‘gnomic will’ and reflected thought. ‘Gnomic will’ makes choices in a fallen world of thought, which originated in the Logos, but is reflected back to the self as a pre-existing, separate and self-sufficient material reality with an existence somehow emanating from itself. After the Fall, Adam objectified the world as a material reality. This was the forbidden ‘knowledge’ gained from the tree.

Before the Fall, Adam and Eve saw each other through the eyes of ‘natural will’, i.e. through Love, which is to say the Logos or God.

Following the Fall, having gained knowledge, Adam and Eve objectified each other each other, discovering shame, rather than Love.

‘Natural will’ is divine intention, i.e. Love.

‘Gnomic will’ is false, deluded and evil; but we will it, i.e. we want it, we take pleasure in the objectified.

Only Love overcomes the need for this, there being no shame in love.

Love does not belong over there with the objective and problematical. I quote a relevant piece from my Child of Encounter:

If consciousness and mind cannot be subject to rational explanation, then the answer to this question will not be found in the domain of the problematical and the objectively valid. Love is the only starting point of such mysteries of body and soul. It is a dizzying reflectiveness without reference points. I am not referring to love in the agape giving sense; I mean unrelieved sickness and nausea, Eros, sexuality, destructive lust. To be stuck in the domain of the problematical and the objectively valid is to be enveloped in assurance and certainty. And yet what are the criteria of true love? There are none. Criteria only exist in the order of the objective and problematical. Criteria, those presuppositions, belong over there, with them, ‘the they’. Love belongs over here, with me as an individual and the mystery.

Love shapes the world. ‘A chance encounter can have consequences for eternity’.


© John Dunn.

Love and the true self

Thursday, 13 January 2022 at 20:23

St Maximus the Confessor on Dr John Dunn. Love and the true self

Everyone lives a deluded life until at some point he is awakened to the divine intention for his being.*

This leads us to the possibility of communion with others, as understood from my readings of St Maximus.

Whether of not man acts out the potential given by God, his true self is nevertheless kept in God and contemplated by Him.

The divine intention is constant, and could be said to be the true self of any individual, regardless of the deluded persona under which he might exist.

The point at which the deluded individual recognises that he is divinely interconnected with another being’s true self is Love.

Love transcends the deluded state in which one or both or more true selves are enshrouded, and establishes a relationship of true selves, a communion, however fleeting, during which they more closely track the divine intention laid out for them.

*See 'Blog' for The self from which the pertinent point is this:

To be a self is not our achievement, but rather a gift from God

There is something to be achieved from our own effort, namely, how we give form to the modes of activity.

However,something is given before any activity occurs. The mystery of an individual’s selfhood is kept in the mystery of the divine being.

Whenever we act out the potential that we are given by God, we give form to the mode of action in accordance (or discordance) with the divine intention for our being, as a self.

It is possible to live as divinely intended, but one may also lead a life of delusions separated from one’s true purpose.


© John Dunn.

The self

Wednesday, 12 January 2022 at 17:29

Saint Maximus on Dr John Dunn. The self
Thoughts prompted by the writings of St Maximus

The essential characteristics of man are common at the universal, but never circumscribe one self, unless as a prison (I’ll come to this later).

For example, Peter, John and Paul are human beings and being a rational animal is an essential characteristic of such humanness. Rationality is essential for being the entity a human being; necessary, but not sufficient to be a self.

The essential characteristics are the forms which exist by themselves, while the
self indicates a someone of those forms, i.e. someone, the self, who carries the forms in the concrete sense.

The individual has essential characteristics that are common, while in addition he has the personal characteristics of being that belong to himself.

The essence has only the essential characteristics of the species, whereas the individual has in addition that which shows thesomeone.

Peter is in all respects human being; there is nothing in Peter that is not human. On the other hand, to be human being is not in all respects to be Peter.

There is a distinction between being something and someone.

Let us move on from essential characteristics, which might be misinterpreted as being static, to modes of activity. The same principles apply.

There are modes of activity common to all. We are all active as being something. However when an individual gives form to a mode of activity, he manifests himself as a someone.

The character of being an individual is to give character to the mode of activity.

A human being is an individual when he assumes the modes of activity common to all, with a potentiality of power, in such a way that he gives form to those activities as belonging to himself, as a someone.

In order to be an individual an entity must be a someone who gives form to a mode of activity.

This condition is necessary but not sufficient.

A materialist would say that man is an essence with properties. Even if the properties are not unique to individual, the combination is unique. For example, one man differs from another because of the different time,place and circumstances in which they live. In this sense, man remains a something, an instantiation of properties, however unique.

But being something is to be distinguished from being someone.

In addition to being an entity, a something, distinguished by a set of properties, who gives form to modes of activity, each is created, not only as man, but also as a
self.

Here we need the doctrine of man being created in the image and likeness of God. It brings with it a distinctive dynamics, but also a mystery, since what we are in our deepest self is hidden in the divine intention for our being, as a selves.

To be a self is not our achievement, but rather a gift from God

There is something to be achieved from our own effort, namely, how we give form to the modes of activity.

However,something is given before any activity occurs. The mystery of an individual’s selfhood is kept in the mystery of the divine being.

When ever we act out the potential that we are given by God, we give form to the mode of action in accordance (or discordance) with the divine intention for our being, as a
self.

It is possible to live as divinely intended, but one may also lead a life of delusions separated from one’s true purpose.* (He can of course be imprisoned within these delusions by others, but this must be dealt with elsewhere.)

The true self is kept in God and the true principles contemplated by Him.

One’s self as a mystery is to be achieved in a stretching out for God

This self is not an autonomous entity, a collection of properties however unique, haunting a ready-made world; it is, rather, an entity that is realised in a life characterised by being in accordance with divine intention.

* (For my personal record) In future work I will relate these delusions back to Massimo Scaligero’s concept of disconnection from the Logos in reflected thought.


© John Dunn.

On the shoulders of giants

Tuesday, 11 January 2022 at 18:08

Orion the giant and his helping eyes on Dr John Dunn. Orion the blind giant carried his servant Cedalion on his shoulders to act as his eyes.

On the shoulders of giants

Today I have transferred my final three readings and summaries of Massimo Scaligero’s The Logos and the New Mysteries to the collected readings held in ‘Thought pieces’. This collection is entitled simply Scaligero. The transferred readings are:

Lightning-bolt Logos
Inside out
The flash of lightning that shines


Massimo Scaligero amazed me from my first reading, in that I immediately felt the shadowing influence of three other great minds, namely Giovanni Gentile, Julius Evola and Rudolf Steiner. To a certain degree, Scaligero managed to fuse the best of these influences, and in doing so move beyond each of them.

I am bound to say that I was disappointed with the ending to The Logos and the New Mysteries, or rather the ending that never arrived.

I thought that Scaligero was strong on the analysis of the problem, i.e. our bondage to sensory perception and the physical view of reality as a presupposed idol; but his proffered alternative was a small part of the work, rushed in at the very end of the book. Nevertheless he has added apiece to my own construction of an alternative worldview and cosmogeny,which has drawn upon some of the thinkers mentioned above and more.


© John Dunn.

Previous Entries
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
           
8
14
18 22
         
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
Website design and CMS by WebGuild Media Ltd
This website ©2009-2022 John Dunn