What do you think?
Rate this book
Tertium Organum
Ouspensky's believed "Tertium Organum" was the third major philosophical synthesis, the previous being those of Aristotle and Bacon. With the publication of "Tertium Organum" in Russian, in 1912, Ouspensky became a widely respected author and lecturer on metaphysical questions. The American translation of Tertium Organum in 1922, won him widespread recognition in England, where he lived from 1921, and in America.
Ouspensky’s experimental efforts to enter higher states of consciousness proved to him that an entirely new mode of thought was needed by modern man, qualitatively different from the two modes (classical and positivistic) that have dominated Western civilisation for 2000 years. "Tertium Organum" is a clarion call for such thought, ranging brilliantly over the teachings of Eastern and Western mysticism, sacred art and the theories of modern science.
Ouspensky’s experimental efforts to enter higher states of consciousness proved to him that an entirely new mode of thought was needed by modern man, qualitatively different from the two modes (classical and positivistic) that have dominated Western civilisation for 2000 years. "Tertium Organum" is a clarion call for such thought, ranging brilliantly over the teachings of Eastern and Western mysticism, sacred art and the theories of modern science.
352 pages, Paperback
First published November 30, 1921
About the author
P.D. Ouspensky
157 books373 followersPyotr Demianovich Ouspenskii (known in English as Peter D. Ouspensky, Пётр Демья́нович Успе́нский; was a Russian mathematician and esotericist known for his expositions of the early work of the Greek-Armenian teacher of esoteric doctrine George Gurdjieff, whom he met in Moscow in 1915. He was associated with the ideas and practices originating with Gurdjieff from then on. He shared the (Gurdjieff) "system" for 25 years in England and the United States, having separated from Gurdjieff in 1924 personally, for reasons he explains in the last chapter of his book In Search of the Miraculous.
All in all, Ouspensky studied the Gurdjieff system directly under Gurdjieff's own supervision for a period of ten years, from 1915 to 1924. His book In Search of the Miraculous is a recounting of what he learned from Gurdjieff during those years. While lecturing in London in 1924, he announced that he would continue independently the way he had begun in 1921. Some, including his close pupil Rodney Collin, say that he finally gave up the system in 1947, just before his death, but his own recorded words on the subject ("A Record of Meetings", published posthumously) do not clearly endorse this judgement, nor does Ouspensky's emphasis on "you must make a new beginning" after confessing "I've left the system".
All in all, Ouspensky studied the Gurdjieff system directly under Gurdjieff's own supervision for a period of ten years, from 1915 to 1924. His book In Search of the Miraculous is a recounting of what he learned from Gurdjieff during those years. While lecturing in London in 1924, he announced that he would continue independently the way he had begun in 1921. Some, including his close pupil Rodney Collin, say that he finally gave up the system in 1947, just before his death, but his own recorded words on the subject ("A Record of Meetings", published posthumously) do not clearly endorse this judgement, nor does Ouspensky's emphasis on "you must make a new beginning" after confessing "I've left the system".
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews
October 27, 2010
A completely mind-blowing dose of non-fiction. Although dated, I cannot find anything more modern online or otherwise that refutes his reasoning. That said, this book involves a lot of reasoning that would be difficult, if not impossible, to support factually. Well grounded though, I can't wait to see how deep he can go...
...finally finished this work. I won't attempt to summarize the depth of what is covered in this book. I will only say that if you are a "thinker", constantly searching for more in this world than what is offered at face value, this is a work that will stretch the boundaries of thought for even the most profound thinkers.
The most disturbing part of this all is that this work, and this path of thinking, has been left for dead. He almost predicts this possibility in the book itself.
...finally finished this work. I won't attempt to summarize the depth of what is covered in this book. I will only say that if you are a "thinker", constantly searching for more in this world than what is offered at face value, this is a work that will stretch the boundaries of thought for even the most profound thinkers.
The most disturbing part of this all is that this work, and this path of thinking, has been left for dead. He almost predicts this possibility in the book itself.
July 16, 2017
Stunning, Wondrous and Life Transforming
There are no words to describe the real import and content of this book, nor to remotely intuit the many dimensions of reality that its ideas are extended too. Many hidden dimensions of life and connection with the world of true causes, of which we as mankind? are not even dimly aware. It seems mankind (aka consciousness) has settled instead for the world of the finite, the phenomenal and the positivistic and Ouspensky clearly shows in a very limpid and penetrating Tour-de-Force in words that this all ends in a horrible cul-de-sac. There is no 4th of July for science and instead with one fell swoop of his axe, he leaves the world of science, materialism and modern day psychology in ruins - they are seen as ancient Methuselahs, that have overstayed their welcome -perennial chickens that have lost their heads but still wander around tantalizing a few.
He starts out with his statement of what constitutes the world of the "knowns", namely - (I) The outer world of form, perception and conception and (ii) The inner world of consciousness and thought. He then shows and builds through the framework of an advanced multidimensional psychology that these two worlds are not separate from each other. In fact he shows in many elucidating examples that we only experience what we see as a 3-dimensional world because man possesses a 3-dimensional consciousness. That is man is able to think in concepts as well as percepts and sensations and concepts make it possible for him to experience a 3-d world. Lower animals and single celled organisms that are only capable of perception and sensation experience 2-dimensional and 1-dimensional worlds respectively and are therefore of a lower conscious evolution. They possess simple consciousness and do not possess self-consciousness and so are incapable of knowing themselves as a thing apart from their environment and from their perceptions and sensations. He shows how dogs see the world as a 2-dimensional screen of percepts and are incapable of generalizing their percepts under the banner of concepts and so deteriorate much faster mentally than man as they age. This 2-dimensional consciousness also explains why dogs bark at cars - they see them as `alive'.
Ouspensky brings us to the point where we can clearly see that man himself needs to be transformed. It is the consciousness that sees itself as man that is the chief obstacle standing in the way of progress. Until this is fully realized the myriad problems and sufferings appearing to be in the world outside will remain. They are the reflections of a deep fault and split in man, in which he has failed to take on his more divine and encompassing heritage and to grow. And so Ouspensky progresses inducting us into his new multidimensional psychology and he sees the next step-up for man is the development of 4-dimensional consciousness. This is the consciousness of the superman, spoken off by Jesus in the Bible, in which `time is no longer'. But because man, for the most part seems currently incapable of this conscious evolution, he continues to experience this 4th dimension as time and is restricted therefore to seeing the infinite 4th dimensional space as 3-dimensional world slices. This is depicted to him through his delusory sensory profiling network which pictures the inside to the outside in slices and world cuts on par with his learning and consciousness capabilities at that moment. Within the context of this limiting and false 3-dimensional world slices , Ouspensky points out that it is impossible to establish real cause-and-effect relationships. He gives many punishing examples, by making reference to lower dimensional spaces to show that we often establish cause-and-effect relationships to events that are absolutely disconnected from each other just because they seem to follow contiguously in a time progression within our frame of reference. In fact, Ouspensky shows as well that what we can consider effect is often cause and vica-versa and sometimes both are effects arising from a cause unseen and existing within ourselves, or outside 3-dimensional space. He shows by examples that what seems the same can be different and what seems different can be the same, albeit viewed from a different reference. And what seems separated by time and space in the 3-dimensional space need not be so in the greater context afforded in a higher dimensional space. In this higher dimensional space, closeness is based on affinity and essence rather than spatio-temporal closeness.
His higher logic and canon of thought is grounded in mystical understandings but seems perverse when viewed through the blind eyes of logic, rationalism and causal reasoning. This advanced logic follows through from the theory of infinite numbers, in which the part can be equal to the whole. And so the meaning of the part cannot be understood if we first separate it from the whole and then attempt to understand it. By attempting to separate it from the whole to understand it, we have invalidated the context by which it is meaningful and so lost access to meaning. There is no meaning of the part by itself. It is only its unity with the whole that gives it meaning.
Ouspensky clears states his advanced formulation of this understanding when he gives the equation [A = both A and Not A]. This means to truly understand the part, we have to include both the part and everything that seems outside it. In other words we can only understand the part by understanding the whole, or we can understand the whole by truly understanding the part , but we cannot separate the part from the whole and then try to understand. Any separation creates a false formulation of reality that invalidates the context that would make meaning possible. Ouspensky expands on this logic by extending it to words, concepts, symbols, phenomena and indeed to the world of positivism. He shows that because words, concepts, symbols and phenomena attempt first to partition and separate the reality of Oneness and real causes, they are incapable of apprehending it or serving as vehicles for teaching or expressing it. It is like we broke a mirror into a million pieces and then we use the pieces to attempt to teach you that the mirror is whole and complete. There are many more exceptional, and ground breaking teachings in this book. Ouspensky even dedicates a section to describing the features of the world of true causes.
In fact one of Ouspensky's purposes in this book is to bring one to an awareness that words, concepts, symbols and logic always miss reality and true content. Some of these characteristics that he gives for the world of real causes include that (I) It is a world in which time is experienced spatially (ii) A world in which everything is life itself and forever deathless. There is nothing apart from this one life, even the seemingly physical and inorganic (iii) A world without matter or motion (iv) A world without measure, finite quantities or form (v) A world of no separation in which everything is the whole (vi) A world transcending all seeming dualities, including being/non-being, death/life, motion/stillness, objective/subjective, phenomena/noumena. And yet the world of real causes is not separate from the world we appear to live in. It is the world we appear to live in experienced without duality. Experienced instead through the selflessness of the egoless state. This world of real causes echoes the Buddha's teachings that the Samsara and Nirvana or forever one. That the samsara - our world of the relative existence, namely Hell - is just Nirvana seen through the lens of ignorance and therefore darkness. The Samsara is restored to its ever-presence as Nirvana once the self-distortions that we interpose are removed.
Ouspensky spends the last part of this great work correlating the common threads and unity of many of his ideas, arrived through inductive reasoning and intuition with many of the teachings of the mystics including Jacob Boehme, "The voice of the silence", Theosophy, Feckner, and Dr Bucke's `Cosmic Consciousness'.
There are no words to describe the real import and content of this book, nor to remotely intuit the many dimensions of reality that its ideas are extended too. Many hidden dimensions of life and connection with the world of true causes, of which we as mankind? are not even dimly aware. It seems mankind (aka consciousness) has settled instead for the world of the finite, the phenomenal and the positivistic and Ouspensky clearly shows in a very limpid and penetrating Tour-de-Force in words that this all ends in a horrible cul-de-sac. There is no 4th of July for science and instead with one fell swoop of his axe, he leaves the world of science, materialism and modern day psychology in ruins - they are seen as ancient Methuselahs, that have overstayed their welcome -perennial chickens that have lost their heads but still wander around tantalizing a few.
He starts out with his statement of what constitutes the world of the "knowns", namely - (I) The outer world of form, perception and conception and (ii) The inner world of consciousness and thought. He then shows and builds through the framework of an advanced multidimensional psychology that these two worlds are not separate from each other. In fact he shows in many elucidating examples that we only experience what we see as a 3-dimensional world because man possesses a 3-dimensional consciousness. That is man is able to think in concepts as well as percepts and sensations and concepts make it possible for him to experience a 3-d world. Lower animals and single celled organisms that are only capable of perception and sensation experience 2-dimensional and 1-dimensional worlds respectively and are therefore of a lower conscious evolution. They possess simple consciousness and do not possess self-consciousness and so are incapable of knowing themselves as a thing apart from their environment and from their perceptions and sensations. He shows how dogs see the world as a 2-dimensional screen of percepts and are incapable of generalizing their percepts under the banner of concepts and so deteriorate much faster mentally than man as they age. This 2-dimensional consciousness also explains why dogs bark at cars - they see them as `alive'.
Ouspensky brings us to the point where we can clearly see that man himself needs to be transformed. It is the consciousness that sees itself as man that is the chief obstacle standing in the way of progress. Until this is fully realized the myriad problems and sufferings appearing to be in the world outside will remain. They are the reflections of a deep fault and split in man, in which he has failed to take on his more divine and encompassing heritage and to grow. And so Ouspensky progresses inducting us into his new multidimensional psychology and he sees the next step-up for man is the development of 4-dimensional consciousness. This is the consciousness of the superman, spoken off by Jesus in the Bible, in which `time is no longer'. But because man, for the most part seems currently incapable of this conscious evolution, he continues to experience this 4th dimension as time and is restricted therefore to seeing the infinite 4th dimensional space as 3-dimensional world slices. This is depicted to him through his delusory sensory profiling network which pictures the inside to the outside in slices and world cuts on par with his learning and consciousness capabilities at that moment. Within the context of this limiting and false 3-dimensional world slices , Ouspensky points out that it is impossible to establish real cause-and-effect relationships. He gives many punishing examples, by making reference to lower dimensional spaces to show that we often establish cause-and-effect relationships to events that are absolutely disconnected from each other just because they seem to follow contiguously in a time progression within our frame of reference. In fact, Ouspensky shows as well that what we can consider effect is often cause and vica-versa and sometimes both are effects arising from a cause unseen and existing within ourselves, or outside 3-dimensional space. He shows by examples that what seems the same can be different and what seems different can be the same, albeit viewed from a different reference. And what seems separated by time and space in the 3-dimensional space need not be so in the greater context afforded in a higher dimensional space. In this higher dimensional space, closeness is based on affinity and essence rather than spatio-temporal closeness.
His higher logic and canon of thought is grounded in mystical understandings but seems perverse when viewed through the blind eyes of logic, rationalism and causal reasoning. This advanced logic follows through from the theory of infinite numbers, in which the part can be equal to the whole. And so the meaning of the part cannot be understood if we first separate it from the whole and then attempt to understand it. By attempting to separate it from the whole to understand it, we have invalidated the context by which it is meaningful and so lost access to meaning. There is no meaning of the part by itself. It is only its unity with the whole that gives it meaning.
Ouspensky clears states his advanced formulation of this understanding when he gives the equation [A = both A and Not A]. This means to truly understand the part, we have to include both the part and everything that seems outside it. In other words we can only understand the part by understanding the whole, or we can understand the whole by truly understanding the part , but we cannot separate the part from the whole and then try to understand. Any separation creates a false formulation of reality that invalidates the context that would make meaning possible. Ouspensky expands on this logic by extending it to words, concepts, symbols, phenomena and indeed to the world of positivism. He shows that because words, concepts, symbols and phenomena attempt first to partition and separate the reality of Oneness and real causes, they are incapable of apprehending it or serving as vehicles for teaching or expressing it. It is like we broke a mirror into a million pieces and then we use the pieces to attempt to teach you that the mirror is whole and complete. There are many more exceptional, and ground breaking teachings in this book. Ouspensky even dedicates a section to describing the features of the world of true causes.
In fact one of Ouspensky's purposes in this book is to bring one to an awareness that words, concepts, symbols and logic always miss reality and true content. Some of these characteristics that he gives for the world of real causes include that (I) It is a world in which time is experienced spatially (ii) A world in which everything is life itself and forever deathless. There is nothing apart from this one life, even the seemingly physical and inorganic (iii) A world without matter or motion (iv) A world without measure, finite quantities or form (v) A world of no separation in which everything is the whole (vi) A world transcending all seeming dualities, including being/non-being, death/life, motion/stillness, objective/subjective, phenomena/noumena. And yet the world of real causes is not separate from the world we appear to live in. It is the world we appear to live in experienced without duality. Experienced instead through the selflessness of the egoless state. This world of real causes echoes the Buddha's teachings that the Samsara and Nirvana or forever one. That the samsara - our world of the relative existence, namely Hell - is just Nirvana seen through the lens of ignorance and therefore darkness. The Samsara is restored to its ever-presence as Nirvana once the self-distortions that we interpose are removed.
Ouspensky spends the last part of this great work correlating the common threads and unity of many of his ideas, arrived through inductive reasoning and intuition with many of the teachings of the mystics including Jacob Boehme, "The voice of the silence", Theosophy, Feckner, and Dr Bucke's `Cosmic Consciousness'.
October 11, 2017
Mind-blowing!
Reality-altering!
Mentally-stimulating!
This book is all that and so much more. Just a pure dive into metaphysics and paranormality, and what makes them a reality. The logical reasoning the author uses throughout this book is sound, and I cannot refute his arguments. I can only agree in amazement.
The author focuses on space and time, and how they are REALLY related, and all the derivations of such a relationship. Mind you, he looks at them from a purely UN-positivistic point of view, so everything that modern positivistic science has taught you might be shattered before your very eyes.
I remember reading somewhere, someone describing this book as: "The most important book ever written". Now that might sound like a mighty overstatement, and it is certainly an overstatement.
However, this is DEFINITELY one of the most important books ever written. At least from my perspective.
Read this, and open your heart.
Reality-altering!
Mentally-stimulating!
This book is all that and so much more. Just a pure dive into metaphysics and paranormality, and what makes them a reality. The logical reasoning the author uses throughout this book is sound, and I cannot refute his arguments. I can only agree in amazement.
The author focuses on space and time, and how they are REALLY related, and all the derivations of such a relationship. Mind you, he looks at them from a purely UN-positivistic point of view, so everything that modern positivistic science has taught you might be shattered before your very eyes.
I remember reading somewhere, someone describing this book as: "The most important book ever written". Now that might sound like a mighty overstatement, and it is certainly an overstatement.
However, this is DEFINITELY one of the most important books ever written. At least from my perspective.
Read this, and open your heart.
December 21, 2008
Russian Theosophy at it's best. Read It>
Currently reading
April 1, 2010what i wouldn't give to have been a speck of dust in a room where Ouspensky and Gurdjieff were waxing on...
September 11, 2010
How many times will I allow a Russian Theosophist to break my heart?
I followed his paces so faithfully! He measured his stride so! He spoke to me of his affairs with Kant and with Consciousness.
Ultimately, he believes we are all imperfectly-understanding emanations of the Cosmic Conscious... or of the First Intelligence... call Him what you will.
I still insist that he is the better of Edwin A Abbott (of Flatland acclaim).
I followed his paces so faithfully! He measured his stride so! He spoke to me of his affairs with Kant and with Consciousness.
Ultimately, he believes we are all imperfectly-understanding emanations of the Cosmic Conscious... or of the First Intelligence... call Him what you will.
I still insist that he is the better of Edwin A Abbott (of Flatland acclaim).
October 18, 2017
Brilliant, mind-bending piece about nature of the world and consciousness. It's a must read challenge for all of the materialist science-believers that have fallen into the one-dimensional limited way of thinking and observing the world through the matter only. Ouspensky is succesfully showing the flaws of the positivistic, exact, science and philosophy by offering another, deeper way of thinking outside of the box.
February 9, 2023
يتجلى الحب في سمات الإنسان التي لم يعرفها أبدا في نفسه. في الحب هناك الكثير من العصر الحجري وسبت الساحرات. كثير من الرجال لا يمكن أن يدفعهم أي شيء غير الحب لارتكاب الجريمة والخيانة؛ لا شيء غير الحب يمكن أن يجلب فيهم مشاعر خفية للغاية كان يظن أنها قتلت منذ فترة طويلة.
في الحب هناك قدر هائل من الأنانية والغرور والاعتداد بالنفس. الحب هو القوة العظيمة التي تمزق كل الأقنعة، والأشخاص الذين يهربون من الحب يفعلون ذلك لكي يحتفظوا بأقنعتهم.
إذا كانت عملية الخلق ، وولادة الأفكار ، هي النور الذي يأتي من الحب ، فهذا النور يأتي من نار عظيمة. في هذه النار الأبدية المشتعلة، التي يتم فيها تطهير البشرية وكل العالم، تتطور وتنقي كل قوى الروح البشرية والعبقرية ؛ وربما من هذا اللهب بالتحديد ، أو بمساعدة منه، ستظهر قوة جديدة إلى الوجود ستقود من يتبعها للتحرر من أغلال المادة.
أهم شيء في الحب هو ما ليس موجودا ، وهو غير موجود على الإطلاق من وجهة النظر المادية المعنوية المعتادة.
في هذا الاحساس بما هو ليس موجودا ، يكمن المعنى الأساسي للحب في الحياة البشرية في الاتصال الذي يحدث مع عالم المعجزات، أي مع المعنى الحقيقي بالفعل.
###إنها حقيقة نفسية معروفة أنه في لحظات العاطفة القوية ، والفرح العظيم أو المعاناة الشديدة، فإن كل ما يحد�� حول المرء يبدو له غير حقيقي - أشبه بالحلم. هذه بداية صحوة الروح. عندما يبدأ المرء في المنام في إدراك حقيقة أنه نائم وأن ما يراه هو حلم، فإنه يستيقظ؛ هذا ما يحدث أيضا بالنسبة للروح الت�� اقتربت من يقظتها، والتي بدأت تعي حقيقة أن كل الحياة المرئية هي حلم ، وكلما كانت العواطف الداخلية أقوى ، كلما كانت أكثر اشراقا، وزادت سرعة اقتراب لحظة الوعي بعدم واقعية الحياة.
كتب بيتر ديميانوفيتش أوزبينسكي الذي كان يعمل صحفيا هذا الكتاب عام ١٩١٢ ميلاديا.. بينما أنا أسخر حياتي وطاقتي لاستيعاب فكره وأتعايش معه وأخلقه وعيا جديدا يزين فراغ الفضاء من حولي وركودي الطويل تحت أفكار باهتة لا أجد لها لونا مناسبا للظهور..
كتبه وانقضت كم حركة زمنية ؟ تحركت الأرض والمجرة والكويكبات وأمدت الشمس كوننا بالطاقة والحرارة مرات كثيرة، تماثل الوهم الفعلي مع الوهم المتخيل في ذهني مرة واحدة واشتعلت ذاتي بفعل وقود هذه الحركة ، أنا مغرمة بالسطور التي نقلتني إلى حيث كان يجلس ، أرى زوايا نظره البعيدة وأتماثل معها، أنا مخلوقة وهمية من زمنه، أقتفي أثره في كتاباته ، أو أناه التي فرغت من جسده وصنعتني من الوهم ، أتخيله شاعرا ، أو فنانا، أتخيله قطعة جمالية ، ذرة أحدثت خللا في الوجود أدى لخلق عالم مثالي لميلاد الوعي الجديد.
لطالما استجديت المعنى أن يرمزني وأن يوكلني إلى فعل أسمى من حقيقتي المهدرة، لا أجد شيئا مناسبا لأهبه أنايا ، لا هيئتي ولا مضموني، أريد حرية مطلقة لأتماثل مع كل شيء مجرد وأتوحد معه في ذات جديدة ووعي جديد.
لماذا نظري مقتصر على شكل الحروف وحركة المادة؟ وهو يرى من البعد الذي لم أصل إليه ، يراني أهيم حبا في كتابه، لو يعرف الخالدون بسطورهم في خلايا جسدي وفي حركة الدم الدائبة داخل أوردتي ، أني أتماثل مع الأفكار والاحتمالات لدرجة تغلق معها مخارج رجوعي إلى فكرتي الماضية عن نفسي، أتوه في زحام الأفكار المتشابكة حول ضلوعي ، وأضل الطريق إلى واقعي المدرك ، لا أجد ثباتا ويقينا تستند عليه حركة أقدامي إلا المعنى، لو يعرف المؤلف كم طريقا ��اغرا مهده لي بالمعاني لأعبرها، وأبني منطقة ظلالي المتحركة داخل حدوده ، أسيرة لكل ما فكر فيه، أفكر أيضا في جوهر الأشياء المنتسبة لي ، قياسا للحياة التي تحدث في الداخل، ومشاعري التي تولد طاقات لا نهائية من المنح، أمنحه بها كل الجمال الذي أسير فيه إلى ما لا نهاية، وحيث يمككنا أن نلتقي في جنة من أفكارنا الرقيقة، مدننا الفكرية التي ستمنحنا نعيمها يوما، وتخبرنا أن مذاق الوهم اللذيذ كان جديرا أن نحيا لأجله.
في الحب هناك قدر هائل من الأنانية والغرور والاعتداد بالنفس. الحب هو القوة العظيمة التي تمزق كل الأقنعة، والأشخاص الذين يهربون من الحب يفعلون ذلك لكي يحتفظوا بأقنعتهم.
إذا كانت عملية الخلق ، وولادة الأفكار ، هي النور الذي يأتي من الحب ، فهذا النور يأتي من نار عظيمة. في هذه النار الأبدية المشتعلة، التي يتم فيها تطهير البشرية وكل العالم، تتطور وتنقي كل قوى الروح البشرية والعبقرية ؛ وربما من هذا اللهب بالتحديد ، أو بمساعدة منه، ستظهر قوة جديدة إلى الوجود ستقود من يتبعها للتحرر من أغلال المادة.
أهم شيء في الحب هو ما ليس موجودا ، وهو غير موجود على الإطلاق من وجهة النظر المادية المعنوية المعتادة.
في هذا الاحساس بما هو ليس موجودا ، يكمن المعنى الأساسي للحب في الحياة البشرية في الاتصال الذي يحدث مع عالم المعجزات، أي مع المعنى الحقيقي بالفعل.
###إنها حقيقة نفسية معروفة أنه في لحظات العاطفة القوية ، والفرح العظيم أو المعاناة الشديدة، فإن كل ما يحد�� حول المرء يبدو له غير حقيقي - أشبه بالحلم. هذه بداية صحوة الروح. عندما يبدأ المرء في المنام في إدراك حقيقة أنه نائم وأن ما يراه هو حلم، فإنه يستيقظ؛ هذا ما يحدث أيضا بالنسبة للروح الت�� اقتربت من يقظتها، والتي بدأت تعي حقيقة أن كل الحياة المرئية هي حلم ، وكلما كانت العواطف الداخلية أقوى ، كلما كانت أكثر اشراقا، وزادت سرعة اقتراب لحظة الوعي بعدم واقعية الحياة.
كتب بيتر ديميانوفيتش أوزبينسكي الذي كان يعمل صحفيا هذا الكتاب عام ١٩١٢ ميلاديا.. بينما أنا أسخر حياتي وطاقتي لاستيعاب فكره وأتعايش معه وأخلقه وعيا جديدا يزين فراغ الفضاء من حولي وركودي الطويل تحت أفكار باهتة لا أجد لها لونا مناسبا للظهور..
كتبه وانقضت كم حركة زمنية ؟ تحركت الأرض والمجرة والكويكبات وأمدت الشمس كوننا بالطاقة والحرارة مرات كثيرة، تماثل الوهم الفعلي مع الوهم المتخيل في ذهني مرة واحدة واشتعلت ذاتي بفعل وقود هذه الحركة ، أنا مغرمة بالسطور التي نقلتني إلى حيث كان يجلس ، أرى زوايا نظره البعيدة وأتماثل معها، أنا مخلوقة وهمية من زمنه، أقتفي أثره في كتاباته ، أو أناه التي فرغت من جسده وصنعتني من الوهم ، أتخيله شاعرا ، أو فنانا، أتخيله قطعة جمالية ، ذرة أحدثت خللا في الوجود أدى لخلق عالم مثالي لميلاد الوعي الجديد.
لطالما استجديت المعنى أن يرمزني وأن يوكلني إلى فعل أسمى من حقيقتي المهدرة، لا أجد شيئا مناسبا لأهبه أنايا ، لا هيئتي ولا مضموني، أريد حرية مطلقة لأتماثل مع كل شيء مجرد وأتوحد معه في ذات جديدة ووعي جديد.
لماذا نظري مقتصر على شكل الحروف وحركة المادة؟ وهو يرى من البعد الذي لم أصل إليه ، يراني أهيم حبا في كتابه، لو يعرف الخالدون بسطورهم في خلايا جسدي وفي حركة الدم الدائبة داخل أوردتي ، أني أتماثل مع الأفكار والاحتمالات لدرجة تغلق معها مخارج رجوعي إلى فكرتي الماضية عن نفسي، أتوه في زحام الأفكار المتشابكة حول ضلوعي ، وأضل الطريق إلى واقعي المدرك ، لا أجد ثباتا ويقينا تستند عليه حركة أقدامي إلا المعنى، لو يعرف المؤلف كم طريقا ��اغرا مهده لي بالمعاني لأعبرها، وأبني منطقة ظلالي المتحركة داخل حدوده ، أسيرة لكل ما فكر فيه، أفكر أيضا في جوهر الأشياء المنتسبة لي ، قياسا للحياة التي تحدث في الداخل، ومشاعري التي تولد طاقات لا نهائية من المنح، أمنحه بها كل الجمال الذي أسير فيه إلى ما لا نهاية، وحيث يمككنا أن نلتقي في جنة من أفكارنا الرقيقة، مدننا الفكرية التي ستمنحنا نعيمها يوما، وتخبرنا أن مذاق الوهم اللذيذ كان جديرا أن نحيا لأجله.
April 2, 2021
Being trained as a scientist, I had to suspend my skepticism to embrace the author's thesis in this book. The fourth dimension was always "time" to me, but Ouspensky takes another tack. Why should there be on three dimensions in reality? Maybe there are more, maybe infinite dimensions that our sensual (dimension 1) and perceptual system (dimension 2) cannot "see". (Dimension 3 is "concepts".) Nor can our instruments. Why should we believe in more dimensions? How is this useful? You will have to read this very interesting and thought provoking book to find out one take on how to think about higher dimensions and how this can lead "cosmic consciousness", a name I do not like. Sounds too new age-y. My mind did not change but had to adapt to new ideas to finish this one. Now I think about it all the time.
August 25, 2009
Here you will find the mind of the 19th and 20th century philisopher/ Realizers like Ralph Waldo Emerson & Richard Bucke.
Peter D. Ouspensky (March 4, 1878–October 2, 1947), (Pyotr Demianovich Ouspenskii)a Russian philosopher,who invoked euclidean and non-euclidean geometry in his discussions of psychology and higher dimensions of existence. His first book, The Fourth Dimension, appeared in 1909; his second book, Tertium Organum, in 1912; and A New Model of the Universe in 1931. This last work discusses the idea of esotericism. He also wrote the novel Strange Life of Ivan Osokin, which explored the concept of recurrence or eternal return.
Peter D. Ouspensky (March 4, 1878–October 2, 1947), (Pyotr Demianovich Ouspenskii)a Russian philosopher,who invoked euclidean and non-euclidean geometry in his discussions of psychology and higher dimensions of existence. His first book, The Fourth Dimension, appeared in 1909; his second book, Tertium Organum, in 1912; and A New Model of the Universe in 1931. This last work discusses the idea of esotericism. He also wrote the novel Strange Life of Ivan Osokin, which explored the concept of recurrence or eternal return.
March 1, 2024
Mindblown. Ниједна књига која спомиње "димензије" и "знања" ме до сада није овако одувала...Тачно се види разлика између свих осталих и Успенског, јер је он свесност о себи и свету постизао мукотрпним радом и намерним страдањем, које и Гурђијев проповеда као апсолутну иницијацију за просветљење, а што и показује и доказује хиљадугодишња монашка традиција; за разлику од других који су својим мукотрпним радом и случајном патњом освојили само гигантско подручје знања, али не и свет, а камо ли себе. Цела његова прича о 4-ој димензији која уствари није време, него осећај времена, који је наравно лажан услед наше изопаченог и недовољно оштрог виђења, јер је 4-а димензија уствари простор, али кога не видимо, него видимо само његов отисак у овом тродимензионалном свету, као кад би ставили врхове прстију на сто, па кад склонимо прсте остали би они мали кружићи, а бића на тој дводимензионалној површи би то баш тако видела - као кружиће, шта би они знали о целокупној величина људског бића од кога су уствари потекли ти "кружићи"! "Идеја времена није настала из посматрања кретања у природи, већ су осећај и идеја кретања настали из 'осећаја времена' које поседујемо, а које није ништа друго до несавшен осећај простора, или граница осећаја простора"; па онда наше искуство као тродимензионалних бића који живе у тродимензионалном простору полако, јасно, прецизно и постепено пореди са искуством дводимензионалних бића у дводимензионалном простору и једнодимензионалних бића у једнодимензионалном простору, а сви живимо у истом простору, али различитом искуству, што нас доводи до Кантове изреке да ни простор и време не постоје сами по себи, него само у уму...Такав речити, течни и интелектуални стил је ненадмашив, Успенски - свака част...
July 1, 2019
An interesting critique of positivism and the positive philosophy. It is nice to know that some people even back then were aware of its dangers and dogmas. On the downside, I think the positions he gives near the beginning on subjective/objective, and later with the phenomenon/noumenon, are not in any way philosophically original ideas. Appeal to the fourth dimension and to infinity, seem to me to be very vague appeals, certainly not philosophically precise enough concepts. The notion of hidden sides to reality underlying the surface of phenomena, and the ideas he evokes with this, are fascinating and important to consider. This is something, in its great depths of meaning, that for sure the positive philosophy loses touch with. And, important is the idea that if we want to ascribe reason to ourselves, as humans, we must also see reason in all other beings in the universe. It is similar to an important idea in recent philosophy of mind, that argues for panpsychism on the grounds of the absurdity of drawing a demarcation at any point in beings between consciousness and lack of consciousness.
In sum, the spiritual suggestions and critique of positivism are valuable. The philosophical arguments of his own though, are not adequate and to me, don't show nearly enough discernment of the subtleties of philosophical debates. He says how positivism cannot understand the meaning of things, only the how, yet why then does he not point out that past philosophies such as Aristotle had allowance for different kinds of explanations of phenomena, that positivism lost sight of, in favour solely of efficient causation? None of the ideas of past philosophers are raised in any detail. But instead repeated in plain and simplified language as if they are his own new ideas. For the philosophical claims he makes of the work, he has to be criticised on these grounds as making clearly inflated claims. But that does not take away from the importance of some of the concepts he considers, nor of the debates he considers, but there are better sources for more specific and targeted treatments of these problems.
In sum, the spiritual suggestions and critique of positivism are valuable. The philosophical arguments of his own though, are not adequate and to me, don't show nearly enough discernment of the subtleties of philosophical debates. He says how positivism cannot understand the meaning of things, only the how, yet why then does he not point out that past philosophies such as Aristotle had allowance for different kinds of explanations of phenomena, that positivism lost sight of, in favour solely of efficient causation? None of the ideas of past philosophers are raised in any detail. But instead repeated in plain and simplified language as if they are his own new ideas. For the philosophical claims he makes of the work, he has to be criticised on these grounds as making clearly inflated claims. But that does not take away from the importance of some of the concepts he considers, nor of the debates he considers, but there are better sources for more specific and targeted treatments of these problems.
March 8, 2020
I have read this book 5 times already. And with a good reason for that. It can be called the 'Bible of the intellect'. This book shatters positivist philosophy to pieces and proves the necessity of Meditation/Yoga (unity)/Fourth Way or another 'spiritual' practice if one wants to get in touch with Reality in the short life-span that has been given to us on this Earth.
If you don't realize the significance of this book, read a lot of poetry, do some psychedelics, listen to Alan Watts' lectures, and contemplate a lot about the nature of reality through science, philosophy (thought experiments). Then try reading the book again. Repeat the process until you get a connection with this book.
I read it after I started the Work (Fourth Way) so it has added smoothly to my process of 'know thyself'. It is an intellectual proof of the fact that humanity is asleep and subjective, and that it needs to awaken and become objective.
Pardon me if I sounded too arrogant or preachy,
with some love (as much as a sleeping being can feel :) ),
Darko.
If you don't realize the significance of this book, read a lot of poetry, do some psychedelics, listen to Alan Watts' lectures, and contemplate a lot about the nature of reality through science, philosophy (thought experiments). Then try reading the book again. Repeat the process until you get a connection with this book.
I read it after I started the Work (Fourth Way) so it has added smoothly to my process of 'know thyself'. It is an intellectual proof of the fact that humanity is asleep and subjective, and that it needs to awaken and become objective.
Pardon me if I sounded too arrogant or preachy,
with some love (as much as a sleeping being can feel :) ),
Darko.
December 21, 2007
Very hard book to read and comperhend. I am not too sure if I ever understand this book, might finish it in couple of years!
February 2, 2021
The book is like having a deep philosophical conversation with the author over a cup of coffee. it starts with a phrase 'in the end there will be no more time for man'. And the book takes you on a series of interconnected chapters that explain this phrase and its meaning.
The book does not focus on just one aspect, it covers a lot of areas, math, religion, spirituality, metaphysics, logic.. its like a conversation that seems to shift scope but if you think of it, everything is connected.
its not really a hard read, you just need to keep reading and see if you agree, like all philosophy books, its a point of view.
The book does not focus on just one aspect, it covers a lot of areas, math, religion, spirituality, metaphysics, logic.. its like a conversation that seems to shift scope but if you think of it, everything is connected.
its not really a hard read, you just need to keep reading and see if you agree, like all philosophy books, its a point of view.
Read
January 3, 2010this the real book and i will try to find original book over than 700 pages
December 4, 2022
This is first and foremost a book about dimensions, of which us humans can only really fathom the first three, which is such a shame but also a hard fact.
Although *Tertium Organum* was written more than 100 years ago, it is the exact opposite of old hat.
Written in plain and simple fashion, completely devoid of fancy words or intimidating mathematics, the author of this ultrafine book uses only argumentative and logical concepts thus never succumbing to esoteric vagueness or philosophical meandering.
In fact, all logical reasoning here is totally sound, the arguments are rocksolid, unrefutable and vibing with such charming simplicity that makes this book so deeply entertaining and a joy to dive into.
Not to forget, Ouspenskys explanation of the fourth dimension and how it relates to space and time of our perceived third dimension is nothing short of brilliant, because i was able to understand it from the get-go without any risk of brainfuck or mindmelt, due to the irresistably economic use of language and logic, making Tertium Organum the Bible of the Intellect, as some reviewer here liked to call the book.
And finally, since it is a futile attempt to summarize the depth of what this stunning book covers, let me just say that if you are a "Thinker", constantly searching for more in this world than what is offered at face value, this here is a work that will stretch the boundaries of thought for even the most profound thinkers and it becomes exponentially more profound with each chapter. Seriously, I don't recall having ever read anything quite as thought-provoking as this little gem here.
AUTHOR NOTES
Peter D. Ouspensky (March 4, 1878–October 2, 1947) was a Russian bigthinker who invoked euclidean and non-euclidean geometry in his discussions of psychology and higher dimensions of existence. His first book, The Fourth Dimension, appeared in 1909; his second book, Tertium Organum, in 1912.
He met Georges Gurdjieff in Moscow in 1915, and was associated with the ideas and practices originating with Gurdjieff from then on. He taught ideas and methods based in the Gurdjieff system for 25 years in England and the United States.
Although *Tertium Organum* was written more than 100 years ago, it is the exact opposite of old hat.
Written in plain and simple fashion, completely devoid of fancy words or intimidating mathematics, the author of this ultrafine book uses only argumentative and logical concepts thus never succumbing to esoteric vagueness or philosophical meandering.
In fact, all logical reasoning here is totally sound, the arguments are rocksolid, unrefutable and vibing with such charming simplicity that makes this book so deeply entertaining and a joy to dive into.
Not to forget, Ouspenskys explanation of the fourth dimension and how it relates to space and time of our perceived third dimension is nothing short of brilliant, because i was able to understand it from the get-go without any risk of brainfuck or mindmelt, due to the irresistably economic use of language and logic, making Tertium Organum the Bible of the Intellect, as some reviewer here liked to call the book.
And finally, since it is a futile attempt to summarize the depth of what this stunning book covers, let me just say that if you are a "Thinker", constantly searching for more in this world than what is offered at face value, this here is a work that will stretch the boundaries of thought for even the most profound thinkers and it becomes exponentially more profound with each chapter. Seriously, I don't recall having ever read anything quite as thought-provoking as this little gem here.
AUTHOR NOTES
Peter D. Ouspensky (March 4, 1878–October 2, 1947) was a Russian bigthinker who invoked euclidean and non-euclidean geometry in his discussions of psychology and higher dimensions of existence. His first book, The Fourth Dimension, appeared in 1909; his second book, Tertium Organum, in 1912.
He met Georges Gurdjieff in Moscow in 1915, and was associated with the ideas and practices originating with Gurdjieff from then on. He taught ideas and methods based in the Gurdjieff system for 25 years in England and the United States.
February 6, 2024
While there are many problems let's start with what I liked. This book talks about the idea of the fourth dimension and using it to get to some potential transformative way of thinking about things. Where the mind takes you from there can be infinite. At first I thought this was a fairly common way of thinking. Think about overlapping "realms" such as those from the Kaballah as not "higher" or invisible, but an added extra dimension. How about "As above so below" in this context as well? Not that the book indicates such examples, but one can fit this into a range of things. This is about 1/3 of the book and anything after that I wouldn't recommend.
While there are many problems with the text itself I think the biggest is that a large part of the book is shadow boxing Positivism ("A doctrine contending that sense perceptions are the only admissible basis of human knowledge and precise thought") which was probably a big deal at the time. Unfortunately, rather than having things stand on their own or build off of the ideas presented we instead see, what I believe, is too much effort on defense. The book might as well have "anti-positivism" in the title due to how much we read here.
We also include a strange escalation of certain character traits such as artists. While this is common in certain circles I found it a bit aggressive in this book. Looking into the author's past and other books it appears that we are seeing the author's personality shine through. I don't believe it was intentional self-aggrandizing, but instead something that likely shone through. However, I think the context in which this was given made the results a bit blind of others and their own traits making it problematic.
Finally, although there are other issues, the latter book is built off of bricks from the prior. Some of these bricks did not stand well to time nor do they allow much inclusion of falsifiability. Which is a bit ironic considering the initial chapters. Additionally we have what appears to be a bit of theosophy used as the ground bricks which is being built off of rather than the original theory itself. If you don't agree with the initial points it's hard to go much farther than the basic talks of 4th dimension thinking.
While there are many problems with the text itself I think the biggest is that a large part of the book is shadow boxing Positivism ("A doctrine contending that sense perceptions are the only admissible basis of human knowledge and precise thought") which was probably a big deal at the time. Unfortunately, rather than having things stand on their own or build off of the ideas presented we instead see, what I believe, is too much effort on defense. The book might as well have "anti-positivism" in the title due to how much we read here.
We also include a strange escalation of certain character traits such as artists. While this is common in certain circles I found it a bit aggressive in this book. Looking into the author's past and other books it appears that we are seeing the author's personality shine through. I don't believe it was intentional self-aggrandizing, but instead something that likely shone through. However, I think the context in which this was given made the results a bit blind of others and their own traits making it problematic.
Finally, although there are other issues, the latter book is built off of bricks from the prior. Some of these bricks did not stand well to time nor do they allow much inclusion of falsifiability. Which is a bit ironic considering the initial chapters. Additionally we have what appears to be a bit of theosophy used as the ground bricks which is being built off of rather than the original theory itself. If you don't agree with the initial points it's hard to go much farther than the basic talks of 4th dimension thinking.
January 11, 2023
Not the kind of book to be thumbed through flippantly or lightly. Ouspensky, as with all of his works (and Gurdjieff’s as well), demands a high degree of attention, discrimination, and effort from his readers until the gradual realization and assimilation of ideas can take root. Often, Ouspensky’s style is painfully esoteric. However, these are the times most essential for the reader to devote all available attention to the text and overcome the intellectual impasse. Once a sincere effort is made, the words themselves become a conduit to a new and enhanced orientation of one’s place in the universal scheme. Tertium Organum is a very uphill journey for the mind as anything dealing in the subject matter of cosmic evolution should be.
As progress increases, the implications of Tertium Oganum’s ideas are slowly impressed upon the mind of the reader and his/hers insight expands proportionally. In this way, each chapter presents new and groundbreaking (albeit tenuous) concepts for the finite time and space bound mind to grasp.
The sheer erudition of the author is impressive. The depth of his learning is not only extensive but interdisciplinary: mathematics, philosophy, reactionary positivism versus mystical intuition, etc. There is a lot here for one who is willing to dedicate serious time to its discernment, study, and eventual application.
Ouspensky says himself in the conclusion that cosmic consciousness is not inherent in the whole of humankind. Not everyone is capable of transcending to such a state or even approaching it remotely by intellect. Only the serious and dedicated can hope for a glimpse, which in itself is very nearly impossible, and the finishing of this book is its own test of the will towards this end.
As progress increases, the implications of Tertium Oganum’s ideas are slowly impressed upon the mind of the reader and his/hers insight expands proportionally. In this way, each chapter presents new and groundbreaking (albeit tenuous) concepts for the finite time and space bound mind to grasp.
The sheer erudition of the author is impressive. The depth of his learning is not only extensive but interdisciplinary: mathematics, philosophy, reactionary positivism versus mystical intuition, etc. There is a lot here for one who is willing to dedicate serious time to its discernment, study, and eventual application.
Ouspensky says himself in the conclusion that cosmic consciousness is not inherent in the whole of humankind. Not everyone is capable of transcending to such a state or even approaching it remotely by intellect. Only the serious and dedicated can hope for a glimpse, which in itself is very nearly impossible, and the finishing of this book is its own test of the will towards this end.
January 25, 2024
The book falls slightly short of its name, but only just so.
It's a marvelous book, and its shortcomings are more than made up by the book's uncanny prescience. Ouspensky predicted the advances that materialistic science would make within the next century, less the computer.
His observations of the shortcomings of mechanicalism/rationalism/atheism have only been verified by the scientific discoveries we've made in the intervening century, and short of a few tweaks regarding the technology of his time, this could be published today with very little edited out.
His writing is fairly clear, though the first half of the book required a reread of every passage to pass onto a complete understanding of the models he was asking me to build, but Ouspensky shines here because he routinely explains concepts twice quickly, as he's a master of concepts and models and understands the reader needs two frames of reference to build from. Oftentimes with other authors I have to trod on and hope to source out additional context later on in the passage or text to clarify, because I haven't read a specific passage of fucking Kant.
His chapter on love was nothing short of brilliant, and that he somehow could tie it together with spacetime and thought in the end just compounds his argument on the likelihood of the hypothesis of a pantheistic phenomenal reality of consciousness. Or God in all and all in God.
I can't express how much this book gripped me, and will probably sit with me. It ends with a fairly standard pate of spiritualism, but it's still great.
Where I am concerned is Ouspensky and his likes work's being used to create a 5D consciousness movement in 2023 that is, from my jaded perspective, delusional.
It's a marvelous book, and its shortcomings are more than made up by the book's uncanny prescience. Ouspensky predicted the advances that materialistic science would make within the next century, less the computer.
His observations of the shortcomings of mechanicalism/rationalism/atheism have only been verified by the scientific discoveries we've made in the intervening century, and short of a few tweaks regarding the technology of his time, this could be published today with very little edited out.
His writing is fairly clear, though the first half of the book required a reread of every passage to pass onto a complete understanding of the models he was asking me to build, but Ouspensky shines here because he routinely explains concepts twice quickly, as he's a master of concepts and models and understands the reader needs two frames of reference to build from. Oftentimes with other authors I have to trod on and hope to source out additional context later on in the passage or text to clarify, because I haven't read a specific passage of fucking Kant.
His chapter on love was nothing short of brilliant, and that he somehow could tie it together with spacetime and thought in the end just compounds his argument on the likelihood of the hypothesis of a pantheistic phenomenal reality of consciousness. Or God in all and all in God.
I can't express how much this book gripped me, and will probably sit with me. It ends with a fairly standard pate of spiritualism, but it's still great.
Where I am concerned is Ouspensky and his likes work's being used to create a 5D consciousness movement in 2023 that is, from my jaded perspective, delusional.
July 27, 2021
Interesting
Mostly towards the end there is an interesting and useful survey of different traditions and belief systems all supposedly converging on ... well, something.
But as for his own main themes and ideas ... well, honestly, what a turgid pile of adolescent waffle. Supposedly he created a great stir in the UK intelligentsia upon arriving in London in the early 1900s. This is either a simply false claim or hard to credit. Perhaps standards were much lower back then or he was simply the flavour of the month in that particular month.
He claims there are Three fundamental organons of thought. First Aristotle, then Francis Bacon and then ultimately Ouspensky with a few vague and ambiguous formulations of a supposedly higher logic. Gimme a break. What a load of crap.
He has An infatuation with four and higher dimensional geometry as the key to inner mysteries. I suppose it was a bit new back then and used not just by Ouspensky to ‘explain’ the supposedly inexplicable. Much as quantum mechanics is now. But both are really just simple enough pieces of mathematics. Nothing more and nothing less.
Mostly towards the end there is an interesting and useful survey of different traditions and belief systems all supposedly converging on ... well, something.
But as for his own main themes and ideas ... well, honestly, what a turgid pile of adolescent waffle. Supposedly he created a great stir in the UK intelligentsia upon arriving in London in the early 1900s. This is either a simply false claim or hard to credit. Perhaps standards were much lower back then or he was simply the flavour of the month in that particular month.
He claims there are Three fundamental organons of thought. First Aristotle, then Francis Bacon and then ultimately Ouspensky with a few vague and ambiguous formulations of a supposedly higher logic. Gimme a break. What a load of crap.
He has An infatuation with four and higher dimensional geometry as the key to inner mysteries. I suppose it was a bit new back then and used not just by Ouspensky to ‘explain’ the supposedly inexplicable. Much as quantum mechanics is now. But both are really just simple enough pieces of mathematics. Nothing more and nothing less.
April 27, 2020
Brilliant book!
May 4, 2020
Love this book, but only a few pages at a time. The ideas are intense and have far reaching implications. You can almost feel the dissatisfaction the man must have had with superficial life.
August 6, 2020
Love Ouspensky generally, a man with an incredible mind and outlook but thought his book A New Model Universe was just that bit better.
January 20, 2021
Incredible!
December 11, 2021
"I have called this system of higher logic Tertium Organum because for us it is the third canon—third instrument—of thought after those of Aristotle and Bacon. The first was Organon, the second, Novum Organum. But the third existed earlier than the first" - P.D. Ouspensky
January 14, 2023
This book stands in a league of its own: A true jewel, a timeless masterpiece.
February 4, 2023
Read this when you don't see a way forward. The path may be outside the realm of our thoughts!
July 25, 2024
I rated this 1 stars at first, but that was mostly out of disappointment in how the book drops in quality around 150 pages or so. Up until that point, this book was an intriguing exploration of some post-Kantian problems relating to space or time, connecting them to animal psychology and the idea of the fourth dimension. I decided to up the rating to 2 stars because this part is worth reading for anyone. What is great about the first sections of this book is that it tries to expand Kant's ideas in a productive way and without sacrificing his ambitious visions, rather than trying to gain fame by trying to become the new Kant or the guy who "refuted" Kant. Ouspensky's take on Kant is interesting also in that it is very much focused on the earlier side of the book, to Aesthetic and Analogies of Experience in particular, while one could argue that thinkers of German Idealism gave far more emphasis to Transcendental Dialectic.
Unfortunately, the book eventually devolves into a type of mystificatory rhetoric common at the time of its publication, with its attacks against logic and appeals to give over all inquiry of the fourth dimension to the arts because they represent the psychic life. In short, he seems to be commanding the reader not to think, to be thoughtlessly spiritual, not to explore the properties of things but gawk at their most superficial qualities, be afraid of apartments where someone died, take genera at face value etc. The inaccessibility of the fourth dimension becomes an excuse to admit anything and everything as a valid investigation and even a roadblock against anything promising, in favour of arts, the range of which includes everything from Kid Rock to Mozart.
So, it's not that I'm against the plan of the book and the insights of the first 150 pages: I am moreso disappointed that after such a promising start it is as if the author gives up and rejects his dazzling ambitions for a brand of conventionalist superstition so popular among "occult" circles even today.
EDIT 7/3/2024: Some other criticisms..
If it is true that dogs perceive their tails as living because they are three-dimensional moving objects and the dog conceptualizes space like a flatlander, and that this analogy serves as a clue that us humans perceive objects moving in the fourth dimension as alive, does this not mean that dogs would not actually perceive anything because they would be our perceptions of mere objects moving in the fourth dimension, and does that not mean, in turn, that their supposed perception of their tail as alive due to the 2D, as recognizable a phenomenon that is, would not serve as an analogy for our perceptions in the 4th dimension?
Second objection: what does it mean to perceive something as alive? It's as if the creatures commonly referred to as alive are reified merely on account of convention, ignoring the fact that phenomena like fire display traits of life like feeding, expansion, energy consumption to propel movement etc. Then, the essential traits of fire that we could find could just as well be made to serve as signposts of life as those which are currently called organic molecules. So, I guess these two are the precise parts where I must part ways with this book..
EDIT: 7/25/2024
Skimming this a bit more...Maybe the tendency of humans to classify certain sorts of things as "alive" might just be taken as an empirical fact, instead of trying to question the validity of the classification. In terms of the classifications, only homeostasis sticks out as something truly only applicable to what is conventionally considered as "living". And what is that? Everything in the environment that has some kind of symmetry, but especially animals and trees which have bilateral symmetry. Homeostasis-symmetry-balance-duality. What's interesting is that vertebrates defy this with the structure of their inner organs, and humans still more with the structure of their hands: with other vertebrates the division is not visible on the outside, a fact which is also responsible for human dominance. Maybe this duality could represent the "angle" of a higher-dimensional object, seeing as the plane being will see three-dimensionally angled objects as consistently appearing in dual formations, with two figures side by side. The plane being constructs them as a single being through a shared line, while humans construct them as a single being through a shared definite 3D shape. This would make the animals (and trees) a shared spatial area of a single 5D object comprised of two 4D objects, "joint" by the animal.
This book has been so thought-provoking that I have to give it a 5 whatever misdirection could be found...
Unfortunately, the book eventually devolves into a type of mystificatory rhetoric common at the time of its publication, with its attacks against logic and appeals to give over all inquiry of the fourth dimension to the arts because they represent the psychic life. In short, he seems to be commanding the reader not to think, to be thoughtlessly spiritual, not to explore the properties of things but gawk at their most superficial qualities, be afraid of apartments where someone died, take genera at face value etc. The inaccessibility of the fourth dimension becomes an excuse to admit anything and everything as a valid investigation and even a roadblock against anything promising, in favour of arts, the range of which includes everything from Kid Rock to Mozart.
So, it's not that I'm against the plan of the book and the insights of the first 150 pages: I am moreso disappointed that after such a promising start it is as if the author gives up and rejects his dazzling ambitions for a brand of conventionalist superstition so popular among "occult" circles even today.
EDIT 7/3/2024: Some other criticisms..
If it is true that dogs perceive their tails as living because they are three-dimensional moving objects and the dog conceptualizes space like a flatlander, and that this analogy serves as a clue that us humans perceive objects moving in the fourth dimension as alive, does this not mean that dogs would not actually perceive anything because they would be our perceptions of mere objects moving in the fourth dimension, and does that not mean, in turn, that their supposed perception of their tail as alive due to the 2D, as recognizable a phenomenon that is, would not serve as an analogy for our perceptions in the 4th dimension?
Second objection: what does it mean to perceive something as alive? It's as if the creatures commonly referred to as alive are reified merely on account of convention, ignoring the fact that phenomena like fire display traits of life like feeding, expansion, energy consumption to propel movement etc. Then, the essential traits of fire that we could find could just as well be made to serve as signposts of life as those which are currently called organic molecules. So, I guess these two are the precise parts where I must part ways with this book..
EDIT: 7/25/2024
Skimming this a bit more...Maybe the tendency of humans to classify certain sorts of things as "alive" might just be taken as an empirical fact, instead of trying to question the validity of the classification. In terms of the classifications, only homeostasis sticks out as something truly only applicable to what is conventionally considered as "living". And what is that? Everything in the environment that has some kind of symmetry, but especially animals and trees which have bilateral symmetry. Homeostasis-symmetry-balance-duality. What's interesting is that vertebrates defy this with the structure of their inner organs, and humans still more with the structure of their hands: with other vertebrates the division is not visible on the outside, a fact which is also responsible for human dominance. Maybe this duality could represent the "angle" of a higher-dimensional object, seeing as the plane being will see three-dimensionally angled objects as consistently appearing in dual formations, with two figures side by side. The plane being constructs them as a single being through a shared line, while humans construct them as a single being through a shared definite 3D shape. This would make the animals (and trees) a shared spatial area of a single 5D object comprised of two 4D objects, "joint" by the animal.
This book has been so thought-provoking that I have to give it a 5 whatever misdirection could be found...
April 28, 2022
This is the third book I read that was written by Ouspensky and he is becoming one of my favorite authors. I will not even try tell you what this book is about. There is simply too much thought and information in it that defies any short review. What I will say is that, if you want some interesting, amazing, mind-blowing thoughts on ourselves and everything around us then this is the book for you.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews