Talk:Perennial philosophy/Archive 1

Disambiguation Needed

The article Hegel defines Philosphia Perrenis (which it redirects here) as: "[Hegel]...introduced, arguably for the first time in philosophy, the idea that History and the concrete are important in getting out of the circle of philosophia perennis, i.e., the perennial problems of philosophy", connoting something to be avoided, as opposed to this article "Perennial Philosophy" connoting a hypothetical body of absolute truths. It is by no means clear to me that these concepts are mutually exclusive :-) but some clarification of the use of the term(s) would be helpful. Pete St.John 18:51, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

"The same"

Buddhism and Taoism do not have this duality. Jainism is also completely different. Arrow740 00:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

The quote from Aldous Huxley's 'The Perennial Philosophy

The part from the 2nd paragraph: "totally selfness and one-pointed." Should it be "selfless" instead? 203.117.22.248 10:13, 23 April 2007 (UTC) Ut ahat ahsasasad —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.21.133.157 (talk) 01:00, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Added the views of Al-Farabi

The source is 'Classification of Knowledge in Islam', by Dr. Osman Bakar. The book was presented as his doctoral thesis to the Department of Religion at Temple University in Philadelphia in June 1998. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.37.23.147 (talk) 17:10, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I should add, the book has a foreword by Sayyed Hussein Nasr containing his endorsement of Dr. Bakar's research. Nasr is one of the prominent 20th century perennialists so their own tracing of ideas to Al-Farabi is legit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.37.23.147 (talk) 17:26, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Perennial philosophy in Christianity

The section on perennial philosopphy in Christianity reflects only an extreme Evangelical point of view, as the overwhelming majority of the world's Christains, about 51% Catholic, some 15% Orthodox, and 15% Mainstream Protestant all believe that reason "can at least expose you to God". I couldn't find any way to repair this section to make it talk about what it claims, so I will switch the title to "Perennial philosophy in Evangelical Christianity". -Robert —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.2.118.172 (talk) 00:50, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm afraid the article needs a lot more 'fleshing out' than currently is being provided. As it is now, it's more like "Drop anything you like about the subject". Joshua Jonathan (talk) 07:55, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

This interpretation of Augustine is a stretch, to put it mildly. One could easily infer that Augustine was referring to the Hebrew ancients, which would be consistent with the covenant theology that finds its roots in Augustine. Ryancerbus (talk) 16:23, 11 September 2015 (UTC) Ryan Cerbus, 11 Sept 2015

Perennial philosophy in Islam

The statement that, "The idea of a single religious truth was more apparent among Sufi mystics, who borrowed from both the Judaeo-Christian tradition and from Hinduism..." might be specifically true but is generally inaccurate. Sufi mystics historically have been by-the-Book Muslims with all the restraints on pantheism the Qur'an requires. Their mystical interpretation of Qur'an does not imply they defy the Qur'an in favor of Christian or Hindu mysticism. Interfaith or unitarian Sufis are a relatively new phenomenon (last 100 years) more common in Europe and America than in the Middle East. Specifically, this is the contribution of Hazrat Inayat Khan and his followers who represent a small percentage of Sufi practitioners worldwide while being fairly influential in the United States and Europe. Inayat Khan was an orthodox muslim chishi sufi from India. It would be more accurate to say he validated christianity and hinduism while remaining devoted to Islamic tenets. DBlakeRoss (talk) 00:32, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Partly concerned by the above, I have slightly modified the beginning of this subsection. It is a fact, as you say, that the overwhelming majority of Sufis have been defenders of exoteric Islam, but this does in no way set them in a camp against accepting the universality of revelation. Thus I've kept the “more apparent among Sufi mystics” clause, thinking of the majority of known Sufi writers. Think of Ghazali, Rumi, Ibn Arabi, Emir Abd al-Qadir al-Jaza'iri... But in any case, this still needs reworking. The Qur'anic notion of fitra needs to be mentioned, as it is key to the Muslim understanding of universality of wisdom. Hopefully I will have time to look at this section and the entire article more closely within a few days, to add some references throughout, and maybe reconsider the sectioning, as it is looking a little patchy at the moment. Desde la Torre (talk) 17:49, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

There are hardly any citations in this section. It needs to be rewritten or reinforced with proper sources. Am I just supposed to take Wikipedia's word for it that Islam is intrinsically a perennial religion? 169.0.71.17 (talk) 05:21, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

No. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:08, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Usage of Tirukkural

While Tirukkural does tend toward universal ethics, it does not proffer anything like a Perennial Philosophy as defined at the top of this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:0:1000:1A02:CA2A:14FF:FE27:F186 (talk) 22:45, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Greek? Cicero was a Roman

101.172.255.247 (talk) 02:01, 28 July 2012 (UTC) Pepper

I've fixed this by changing the section name to Graeco-Roman Philosophy, with a link to Hellenistic Philosophy. I've also added the ref. to the specific passage in the Tusculanae, and added Heraclitus' quote so that we can have at least one Greek for a start. Hopefully more to come. Desde la Torre (talk) 18:52, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Bold and/or italic

(Copied from User talk:Lova Falk#Perennial philosophy

Hello. In response to your edits, it is an academic convention (in both Chicago and Harvard manuals of style) to put foreign language translations into italics. I am a scholar of Indian religions and my work has been translated into three asian languages. Regards. 81.106.127.14 (talk) 15:38, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Neither is it usual to put these foreign language translations into boldface as you have done. If you read the passage you referred me to you will find this stated. 81.106.127.14 (talk) 15:57, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Ignore all credentials Greetings, Joshua Jonathan (talk) 19:58, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

I think 81.106.127.14 may be right here: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section#Foreign language:

"Do not boldface foreign names not normally used in English, or variations included only to show etymology. However, some foreign terms should be italicized. These cases are described in the Manual of Style for text formatting.

Chernivtsi Oblast (Ukrainian: Чернівецька область, Chernivets’ka oblast’) is an oblast (province) in western Ukraine, bordering on Romania and Moldova.

Inuit (plural; the singular Inuk means "man" or "person") is a general term for a group of culturally similar indigenous peoples inhabiting the Arctic regions ...

In any case, consider footnoting equivalents in non-roman scripts and their transliterations rather than placing them at the opening of an article."

But, in defense of Lova, the Latin name is also being used in publications, so it's not just an etymology. Maybe the question is: what looks better? Meanwhile, I've put the Latin name into a footnote, as recommanded. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 07:57, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Lead

According to WP:LEAD: "The lead should define the topic and summarize the body of the article with appropriate weight." The first section contains a very clear definition on what Pp is. I've replaced two sentences in the lead by this sentence, and added a few others, reflecting the contents of the article. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 08:03, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Unger & Smolin

   On page xv (in "Preface") of Time Reborn, Lee Smolin says

The idea that truth is timeless and somehow outside the universe is so pervasive that the Brazilian philosopher Roberto Mangabeira Unger refers to it as "the perennial philosophy." It was the essence of Plato's thought....

My initial reaction was that some readers of Smolin will falsely conclude that Unger coined the phrase, and that Smolin was either reckless or ignorant. I was ignorant enuf to vaguely associate PP with Walter Lippmann, but not Aldous Huxley (let alone pre-moderns). But after a teaspoon of research, i wonder if Smolin understands even Unger clearly. Don't know if there's anything article-worthy in this, but a comment by someone who has some perspective might be valuable to WP colleagues interested (more than i) in working on the accompanying article.
--Jerzy•t 17:29, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Common-core thesis

I removed the following from Nondualism as off-topic, but suspect it is may be relevant here. Please consider incorporating it into this article. Sondra.kinsey (talk) 19:28, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

“ According to the "common-core thesis", different descriptions can mask quite similar if not identical experiences: The "common-core thesis" is criticised by "diversity theorists" such as S.T Katz and W. Proudfoot. They argue that

[N]o unmediated experience is possible, and that in the extreme, language is not simply used to interpret experience but in fact constitutes experience.

• Spilka e.a. (2003), The Psychology of Religion. An Empirical Approach, New York: The Guilford Press

”

References

Links

Shouldn't the link for "Eternalism" be to the article "Eternalism (philosophy of time)" rather than just to the disambig page, since that is apparently what is meant, rather than, say, a band? 72.106.157.86 (talk) 15:31, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Perennial philosophy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130921054734/http://archive.uua.org/re/other/andrews.html to http://archive.uua.org/re/other/andrews.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/newage.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150518100046/http://www.sriramanamaharshi.org/mpath/2004/october/mp.swf to http://www.sriramanamaharshi.org/mpath/2004/october/mp.swf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091208001357/http://harmonist.us/2009/05/the-end-of-philosophy/ to http://harmonist.us/2009/05/the-end-of-philosophy/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:55, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

"Culminating in the New Age movement."

From neither first hand knowledge nor the "New Age" article do I see Perennial Philosophy playing a causal role in the founding of that movement, over universalism broadly defined. Though it may be worth a section within the article to discuss the relationship between Perennial Philosophy and the New Age movement, we are without authority in claiming a direct causal link between the earlier popularization of Perennial philosophy via the Traditionalist School & Aldous Huxley and the New Age movement itself. Therefore I have removed that last fragment from the head, and I ask that it not be restored without citation, or at the very least softening the "culminating" to something more along the lines of "inspiring." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rayner-hills (talk • contribs) 20:11, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

• There are a lot of sources that refer to perennial philosophy's importance to the new age movement [1]. It seems appropriate to restore mention in some fashion. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 20:19, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

I'll just confess to you straight that I have some intellectual bias here, because I don't think I'm alone in perceiving that the New Age movement isn't exactly renowned for a coherent philosophy and historical narrative, I'm quite impressed the New Age article accomplishes as much as it has. I think Unitarian Universalism would be a good counter example of a movement that has good grounds to claim a direct causal link between itself and earlier twentieth century popularization of perennial philosophy. Nevertheless if you can find a good citation to give evidence for this link, I won't stop you reversing my edit.Rayner-hills (talk) 20:36, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Minus bias, I can understand taking issue with the idea of culmination, which suggests we've reached the end of a line. I'm not looking for a cite just now, but would suggest that something along the lines of P.P being 'integral' to the N.A. movement as a less contentious phrasing. I suspect that won't be hard to support. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 20:41, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Very well, but it only seems reasonable then that Perennial Philosophy should be at the very least mentioned somewhere on the New Age article.

That makes sense. At this point I'll say that I'm approaching this as a copy editor, rather than as one who's versed in the subject. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 20:49, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Ah, well, I cannot claim to be a published authority on the subject either. I'll just end my commenting here with the observation that in the Popularization section of this article, the part on Unitarian Universalism provided strong citations to demonstrate a link between Perennial philosophy and itself whilst the part on the New Age provided what I would argue are tenuous links, but I'll leave it to someone else to judge because, as I say, I'm somewhat biased against the New Age movement. It does strike me as reasonable though, that if it was worth conveying to the reader that the Perennial Philosophy was integral to the New Age movement, then I really would make the case that by that standard the Unitarian Universalism deserves a mention at the head.Rayner-hills (talk) 21:15, 30 December 2017 (UTC)