OnlineBookClub.org

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All, authored by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes appears to be a desperate philosophical quest in search of “The Real Us”. The author philosophizes that the discovery of the real you is possible through a simple process of elimination. Strip the human form of all things genetic and material, and you will be left with a common element among humanity, the spiritual self which will bind us together with untarnished and unblemished love.
This is just a gist of what I could get out of the philosophical maze created by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes. I am not a philosopher but I am a dreamer and a fantasy land adventurer, so I rolled up my sleeves and with a fierce determination decided to read the book sitting on my patio watching the clouds roll by and fantasizing about myself riding on the darkest of the clouds and groping in the darkness trying to figure out how I could make huge cotton candy out of this highly volatile mass drifting away as you touch it but otherwise holding together if you let it float undisturbed. What if I had arms long enough to hug the clouds? Will they be bound together into a giant cotton candy that I could display as a love symbol in a world carnival? Nothing wrong in fantasizing is there? When Eckhart brandished his scimitar and began slashing away at the eyes, nose, throat, dresses, watches, and material things to unveil the ‘Real You”, he must have pondered on the fact that what if God modeled the body first of course in his image and pumped in the spirit or is it the chicken and egg situation?
As I continue to find my way out of the philosophical maze that Eckhart had gotten me into I imagined the spirit and body climbing the pyramid of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and taking their share of Basic Needs, Security, Social, Ego, and the highest need for Self- Actualization. Spirit and body move on hand in hand succumbing to their needs, wants, and desires. The spirit reacts to the acquisitions and deprivations of the needs and gives the body a life attitude and the body adapts to the changing environment and adapts to it like a chameleon changing colors. It is but natural for the spirit and body to adapt to change. Material things change but will always be a part of the body and the personality develops thanks to the spirit. They are inseparable but yes they can evolve into two. Most of us humans are two. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde are in each of us. One of us can be subdued but in most cases inseparable. Conflicts, strife, antagonism, competition, and struggle are ongoing battles within us and spirit is a witness and a referee. We simply cannot do without it. Either face them or end up as schizophrenic or work hard to increase our scores on emotional intelligence.
Seek love Eckhart if you must, tie up the world with a silken string so strong that it holds us together till eternity. Spirit, body, consciousness, and desires. You are putting in immense effort in philosophizing love. Love is in giving without expectations of return. Give us humans, thirsting for love, as much as you can and humanity across the world will be bonded.
Eckhart Aurelius Hughes your book has turned me into a philosophical zombie and it is a wonderful feeling. Never before have I felt so relieved and serene as I am now after going through In It Together The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

I stand to be corrected. But I would say psychology enables conscious love, given that psychology is more inclined to the working of the mind, of consciousness, of thinking (which proves "we are" according to Descartes), and reality.

And this is a very interesting question I'm certainly more inclined to say psychology in this case. Even if you look at the collective imagination collective consciousness where things are culturally imprinted and us , like fear snakes for example, those things come well before philosophy I think philosophy is more developed through.

When I think of the concepts "psychology" vs "philosophy", the first one says, "I feel..." and the latter one says, "I think...". As love is much more closely related to our feelings than our thoughts, love is influenced more by psychology. Philosophy can tell me that I should tolerate someone despite their faults, but as long as I don't deviate from my moral path, I don't have to love them.

I think the one that ultimately develops conscious love is psychology. While philosophy is based on the concept of thinking, it is psychology that creates the emotional bonds between different people. Philosophy can teach you how to love, while psychology emits the desire to love in the first place.

Iselma Kruger wrote: ↑01 Nov 2022, 10:32 When I think of the concepts "psychology" vs "philosophy", the first one says, "I feel..." and the latter one says, "I think...". As love is much more closely related to our feelings than our thoughts, love is influenced more by psychology. Philosophy can tell me that I should tolerate someone despite their faults, but as long as I don't deviate from my moral path, I don't have to love them.

I didn't really know how to feel about this question until I read your reply! I think this sums it up perfectly and also puts it in easy-to-understand terms.

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All, appears to be a desperate philosophical quest in search of “The Real Us”. The author philosophizes that the discovery of the real you is possible through a simple process of elimination. 

You've asked a good question. In my opinion, psychology enables conscious love. Although philosophy has its place in the realm of thought, the feeling of love is more connected with the realm of psychology.

Psychology is about the drama of life. That's where we find romantic love and all the entanglement that goes with that. Philosophy looks at what one values, one's principles of living... and that is where love without conditions is explored. So now, which one offers us the experience of universal love. Neither. That comes when we listen to our intuition. That requires no thinking, simply listening from the heart.

Understanding psychology is freeing in that it teaches you to understand yourself and to accept yourself. Philosophy seeks rather to explain the whys and to cause us to develop an innate understanding of, say, love.

I really like this subtitle because, when I compare the terms "psychology" and "philosophy," the former says "I feel..." while the latter says "I think..." Love is more impacted by psychology since it is more closely tied to our feelings than it is to our thoughts. Philosophy can instruct me to put up with someone's flaws, but as long as I stay on my moral course, I don't have to love them.

Psychology is the one that teaches us to love because that's where we feel. Philosophy just looks at our perception of things. Great subtopic. Thanks for asking.

The description provided suggests that the author may have a philosophical stance that centers on the idea that love is the common element that binds humanity together, and that this love is rooted in the spiritual self. This perspective may be seen as aligning more with philosophy than psychology, as it focuses on metaphysical concepts and the nature of the self. However, as with any philosophical perspective, there may be psychological implications or applications of this idea. Ultimately, the relationship between philosophy and psychology is complex and multifaceted, and any individual's perspective may draw from both disciplines.