Thank you for this video, I find it very interesting. I came from an atheist background and thought I was transgender but I am saved by the grace of God. All my depression and pain is washed clean in him. Praise God
Redeemed Zoomer, this has to be one of your best videos. I’ve been binging on them all, you are a very gifted teacher. One comment though is that you refer to the poor and minorities interchangeably at one point, which is a faux pas; the poor are not necessarily minorities and vice versa. Anyway, this video really helped me understand the left right war in a profound way. I hope you explore this topic further. Thanks again, don’t hold back just because you’re young. I’m most likely 10 years older than you and been a Christian all my life but I’ve learned a crazy amount from your content.
@@redeemedzoomer6053 I think I could say the same thing, may check out a new church always was non denominational but everything you have said with your particular church fits my beliefs and I know we shouldn’t pick what fits our comfort rather than the word, but I mean pure logic and thinking everything you have said hits close to home with many views I have derived on my own such as free will, evolution, etc. I just bunged watched this channel in double speed for the past 6 hrs too😅
@@livebungusreaction great! If you want a solid Church, see if there's one on either of these maps near wherever you are: www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1PNd_sJagci84PyKmGC6M5VJtaLMEWxg&ll=44.03226787444851%2C-92.75978994999998&z=17 www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1SRpkwF4hEaXZvor4BXyoAawrNVgH9CM&ll=34.51287603633076%2C-84.81368661242608&z=5
That was an excellent commentary. I love how you avoid putting liberals as the bad villains trying to ruin society, and instead pointed people at my "ideology" as what we all are: humans. However I, obviously, have some disagreements with some of your opinions. Although I am "left wing", I doubt my views of a better society would be anywhere close to Marxism or mainline socialism/communism views. I think it would either be inclined to social democracy, and even then the line is blurry. It's not like being left-wing automatically means you are liberal (in the sense you discussed) - I guarantee you a politically passionate pro-government Cuban would be much more conservative ideologically than how I would ever be myself. But I am sure you know everything is on a spectrum, even though in your commentary, it sounded like "liberals are one kind of person, and conservatives are the other", but maybe it is just me. Like how you said Christianity is "conservative but with some progressive ideals", I do have to say I am kind of a "liberal" (in the American term) with conservative traces, maybe the term would be a "moderate" but tending to the progressiveness. Even though I am just like how you described - emphasis on care and fairness - I do hold some of these other 3 values too. I think loyalty is just as important as fairness, while purity and authority aren't much of a priority to me, since I believe authority must come from mutual cooperation, and I don't understand what "purity" means (the theory itself isn't clear what it exactly refers to), so I leave this one blank. Regarding art, I think I might be one of the few, but my method of "breaking standards" is precisely by revisiting to the past and learning older types of art. I learned how to play classical recorder, which is almost exclusively baroque music, my current interest is in traditional card and board games - especially Tarot, since I did some research on it and found out it was an European card game family instead of the divination nonsense people believe - and my current interests are with calligraphy, as in the art of writing, and I am learning shorthand, a technique that is close to dead compared to other hobbies. Most of, if not all my interests are rooted in something I learned in history, and I don't intend to break any principles of beauty or to rebel, I am merely revisiting and reviving the past. In any case, I once again salute you for having a level headed opinion about this subject, because it is easy to bring "conservatives vs liberals" and everything goes apeshit, while we all can learn and grow from these interactions.
Interesting video, couple of points to bring up: 1) HUMAN NATURE Why does human nature need to be either good or bad? What about neither? The fact is that people make up their own values irrespective of a God's standard. People differ wildly across the world, different faiths, ethical systems, even within the same Christian denominations there will be diversity of opinion. Your video lays out the differing opinions of liberal vs conversation views on human nature. This suggests that as a sum total of humanity's own standards human nature is neither good nor bad. As you've laid out, your personal belief (along with a decent percentage of people) is one that leans conservative, emphasizing our fallenness. It's true people have capacity for evil of all stripes: greed, negligence, sadism, you name it; but they also have capacity for love, empathy, solidarity, self-sacrifice. It need not be a black or white choice. The above argument about human nature is more about judgement rather than essence. In my view, the liberal conservative split within Christianity is more about GODS nature. It assumes a theistic Christian worldview, or at least an objective morality, before judging human morality. 2) BEAUTY Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, as they say. This is not a postmodern phrase as you claim, its literally from Shakespeare (and earlier). Hume also talks about this, that what we call beauty is just a response to phenomena. Because who is to say Bach is more "transcendent" than The Beatles? Who is to say a painting by Michelangelo is more worthy a piece of art than Duchamp's Urinal? ["Who" in my view is rhetorical, important art is decided by history by critics/artists/the public] The "lack of standards" in art today (which isn't entirely true) is a result of centuries of change throughout the western world starting in the Renaissance and ramping up in the Enlightenment. This questioning of authoritative standards is not just a modern/postmodern thing; and has resulted in every artistic movement/development. The 18th century is a great example, there was a religious symbolic revival with figures like Blake; artists interested in realism, conditions of working people, everyday life; artists interested in rationality and progress, industrialization and technology; romanticism which is interested in the human emotional condition. Who is to say realism or impressionism or romanticism is the most correct and most beautiful? You're right about a lot of modern art lacking craftmanship (although this is a problem with everything nowadays, every product in industrialized capitalistic modernity suffers from this). And its fine to not enjoy conceptual art. It definitely is very pretentious. 3) TRADITION This is where your American context perhaps creates issues with the language. I understand you're using the word liberals as a general category opposed to conservatism, and that you understand leftism and liberalism are not synonymous. So, to be more specific, liberals do not advocate for breaking down the "walls of tradition," generally liberals [in America] see themselves as defenders of the status quo against progressive/leftist/etc who often do advocate that position, and (lets just say it) conservative Republic politicians who advocate for explicitly religious laws that go against the American traditions of separation of church and state/secularism etc. Also liberals would take issue with your characterization here, you're framing them as not being loyal to their race or group. This is assuming that races are in opposition. Which is...debatable. Your worldview is clouding things here. Leftists too are not necessarily opposed to tradition or institutions per se, only that the traditions that have arisen are oppressive to certain groups. Their view is that the specific arrangement of social institutions and their rules are arbitrary, formed by historical developments; and are not universal objective and unchanging. I believe you're referring more to anarchistic worldviews which want overthrow of the order towards a complete lack of the traditions in the future. OVERALL an interesting video, good to see thinking about different people's opinions and worldviews. I suggest you keep reading and expanding your knowledge and trying to approach other's views on their own terms, not yours. It'd be great to see you do videos touching on non-Christian philosophical issues also, because these same political divides are also found elsewhere.
In Christianity humans are evil by nature. Even if you are not religious there is still an argument for it. How many civilizations are know for being evil? How many are know for the good they have done? How many people can you think of who saved millions of lives? How many can you think of that killed millions? (Not including the contributions of religion) there is vary little in the world that was not built on greed or pride. The bar for being a good person is so low in are society you only have to act selfishly to be considered one.
I'm not sure it's quite right to assume "conservatives think human nature is bad and liberals think it is good." I've heard that before of course, but I can't believe how often people seem to accept that... that assertion does not make sense to me.... I have a few observations to support that: One, religiously speaking, if I understand correctly, Judaism does not assert that humans are born either good or bad, but with a capacity for both and are responsible for their own choices. Another: One thing conservatives and libertarians complain about is liberals wanting government regulations on business. Liberals are (broadly speaking) suspicious of letting industries "police themselves" or "regulate themselves" Why would they be pro-regulation if they thought human nature was good? Another: Conservatives seem to be creating quite an alliance with/developing an admiration for: Libertarians. Libertarians (broadly speaking) want as much freedom as possible. Conservatives lately are talking about "freedom" a lot. How does one champion personal freedom if one thinks human nature is bad? So... I am not convinced that conservatives think human nature is bad. I am really not convinced that liberals think human nature is good. I think liberals may be more likely to have sympathy for people (even in cases where one could argue it is not warranted or reasonable), and conservatives are more likely to be demanding of people (even in cases where one could argue it is not warranted or reasonable)... but I don't think that is quite in alignment with thinking human nature is good or bad.
Yup! One of my favorite channels, very interesting. My main disagreement with him is that I like plato more than he does but other than that he's a brilliant guy.
@@redeemedzoomer6053 That’s your main disagreement with him? I thought it would be something about religion. His version of Christianity is bizarre to say the least.
@@bigboineptune9567 you're right that is a much bigger disagreement. I guess the reason I didn't mention that is because that's not one of the things he teaches. He doesn't teach his religion on his channel, but he does teach many other ideas of his, including not really liking Plato.
9:18 You didn't leave a link in the description, as you said you might, but I'm almost sure you're speaking of Jonathan Haidt, who isn't religious but of a Jewish background. I think he's politically moderate. I think he made a lot of good points. But I think he missed something saying that liberals don't care about "authority, loyalty, and purity" The things I am going to say I have read elsewhere, but I do not have the names, links, or references, sorry: For liberals: LOYALTY is demonstrated by their dedication to defending people who have been silenced or oppressed. That is their perceived ingroup, those are the people they are loyal to. Any violation of separation of church and state, or any imposition of religion on anyone, is viewed as a violation of PURITY. Secular democracy and use of government defending of human rights is regarded as legitimate AUTHORITY. So... I have read those counter arguments elsewhere, and find them convincing. I do not think Jonathan Haidt, for all his good points, is correct in saying that liberals do not value a concept of loyalty, purity, or authority. But they do attend to very different things when looking for legitimate ways of expressing loyalty, protecting purity, and accepting/obeying authority.
Thank you for this video, I find it very interesting. I came from an atheist background and thought I was transgender but I am saved by the grace of God. All my depression and pain is washed clean in him. Praise God
Redeemed Zoomer, this has to be one of your best videos. I’ve been binging on them all, you are a very gifted teacher. One comment though is that you refer to the poor and minorities interchangeably at one point, which is a faux pas; the poor are not necessarily minorities and vice versa.
Anyway, this video really helped me understand the left right war in a profound way. I hope you explore this topic further.
Thanks again, don’t hold back just because you’re young. I’m most likely 10 years older than you and been a Christian all my life but I’ve learned a crazy amount from your content.
This channel made me a Christian again
I'm happy to hear that! God bless you and your journey back into the Church
@@redeemedzoomer6053 I think I could say the same thing, may check out a new church always was non denominational but everything you have said with your particular church fits my beliefs and I know we shouldn’t pick what fits our comfort rather than the word, but I mean pure logic and thinking everything you have said hits close to home with many views I have derived on my own such as free will, evolution, etc. I just bunged watched this channel in double speed for the past 6 hrs too😅
@@livebungusreaction great! If you want a solid Church, see if there's one on either of these maps near wherever you are:
www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1PNd_sJagci84PyKmGC6M5VJtaLMEWxg&ll=44.03226787444851%2C-92.75978994999998&z=17
www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1SRpkwF4hEaXZvor4BXyoAawrNVgH9CM&ll=34.51287603633076%2C-84.81368661242608&z=5
That was an excellent commentary. I love how you avoid putting liberals as the bad villains trying to ruin society, and instead pointed people at my "ideology" as what we all are: humans.
However I, obviously, have some disagreements with some of your opinions.
Although I am "left wing", I doubt my views of a better society would be anywhere close to Marxism or mainline socialism/communism views. I think it would either be inclined to social democracy, and even then the line is blurry. It's not like being left-wing automatically means you are liberal (in the sense you discussed) - I guarantee you a politically passionate pro-government Cuban would be much more conservative ideologically than how I would ever be myself.
But I am sure you know everything is on a spectrum, even though in your commentary, it sounded like "liberals are one kind of person, and conservatives are the other", but maybe it is just me. Like how you said Christianity is "conservative but with some progressive ideals", I do have to say I am kind of a "liberal" (in the American term) with conservative traces, maybe the term would be a "moderate" but tending to the progressiveness. Even though I am just like how you described - emphasis on care and fairness - I do hold some of these other 3 values too. I think loyalty is just as important as fairness, while purity and authority aren't much of a priority to me, since I believe authority must come from mutual cooperation, and I don't understand what "purity" means (the theory itself isn't clear what it exactly refers to), so I leave this one blank.
Regarding art, I think I might be one of the few, but my method of "breaking standards" is precisely by revisiting to the past and learning older types of art. I learned how to play classical recorder, which is almost exclusively baroque music, my current interest is in traditional card and board games - especially Tarot, since I did some research on it and found out it was an European card game family instead of the divination nonsense people believe - and my current interests are with calligraphy, as in the art of writing, and I am learning shorthand, a technique that is close to dead compared to other hobbies. Most of, if not all my interests are rooted in something I learned in history, and I don't intend to break any principles of beauty or to rebel, I am merely revisiting and reviving the past.
In any case, I once again salute you for having a level headed opinion about this subject, because it is easy to bring "conservatives vs liberals" and everything goes apeshit, while we all can learn and grow from these interactions.
What is a pro government Cuban? I’ve met a lot of Cubans, but I’ve never met one who was pro government. All my co-workers are Cuban.
Interesting video, couple of points to bring up:
1) HUMAN NATURE
Why does human nature need to be either good or bad? What about neither?
The fact is that people make up their own values irrespective of a God's standard. People differ wildly across the world, different faiths, ethical systems, even within the same Christian denominations there will be diversity of opinion. Your video lays out the differing opinions of liberal vs conversation views on human nature. This suggests that as a sum total of humanity's own standards human nature is neither good nor bad. As you've laid out, your personal belief (along with a decent percentage of people) is one that leans conservative, emphasizing our fallenness. It's true people have capacity for evil of all stripes: greed, negligence, sadism, you name it; but they also have capacity for love, empathy, solidarity, self-sacrifice. It need not be a black or white choice.
The above argument about human nature is more about judgement rather than essence. In my view, the liberal conservative split within Christianity is more about GODS nature. It assumes a theistic Christian worldview, or at least an objective morality, before judging human morality.
2) BEAUTY
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, as they say. This is not a postmodern phrase as you claim, its literally from Shakespeare (and earlier). Hume also talks about this, that what we call beauty is just a response to phenomena.
Because who is to say Bach is more "transcendent" than The Beatles? Who is to say a painting by Michelangelo is more worthy a piece of art than Duchamp's Urinal? ["Who" in my view is rhetorical, important art is decided by history by critics/artists/the public]
The "lack of standards" in art today (which isn't entirely true) is a result of centuries of change throughout the western world starting in the Renaissance and ramping up in the Enlightenment. This questioning of authoritative standards is not just a modern/postmodern thing; and has resulted in every artistic movement/development. The 18th century is a great example, there was a religious symbolic revival with figures like Blake; artists interested in realism, conditions of working people, everyday life; artists interested in rationality and progress, industrialization and technology; romanticism which is interested in the human emotional condition. Who is to say realism or impressionism or romanticism is the most correct and most beautiful?
You're right about a lot of modern art lacking craftmanship (although this is a problem with everything nowadays, every product in industrialized capitalistic modernity suffers from this). And its fine to not enjoy conceptual art. It definitely is very pretentious.
3) TRADITION
This is where your American context perhaps creates issues with the language. I understand you're using the word liberals as a general category opposed to conservatism, and that you understand leftism and liberalism are not synonymous.
So, to be more specific, liberals do not advocate for breaking down the "walls of tradition," generally liberals [in America] see themselves as defenders of the status quo against progressive/leftist/etc who often do advocate that position, and (lets just say it) conservative Republic politicians who advocate for explicitly religious laws that go against the American traditions of separation of church and state/secularism etc.
Also liberals would take issue with your characterization here, you're framing them as not being loyal to their race or group. This is assuming that races are in opposition. Which is...debatable. Your worldview is clouding things here.
Leftists too are not necessarily opposed to tradition or institutions per se, only that the traditions that have arisen are oppressive to certain groups. Their view is that the specific arrangement of social institutions and their rules are arbitrary, formed by historical developments; and are not universal objective and unchanging.
I believe you're referring more to anarchistic worldviews which want overthrow of the order towards a complete lack of the traditions in the future.
OVERALL an interesting video, good to see thinking about different people's opinions and worldviews. I suggest you keep reading and expanding your knowledge and trying to approach other's views on their own terms, not yours. It'd be great to see you do videos touching on non-Christian philosophical issues also, because these same political divides are also found elsewhere.
In Christianity humans are evil by nature. Even if you are not religious there is still an argument for it. How many civilizations are know for being evil? How many are know for the good they have done? How many people can you think of who saved millions of lives? How many can you think of that killed millions? (Not including the contributions of religion) there is vary little in the world that was not built on greed or pride. The bar for being a good person is so low in are society you only have to act selfishly to be considered one.
I'm not sure it's quite right to assume "conservatives think human nature is bad and liberals think it is good." I've heard that before of course, but I can't believe how often people seem to accept that... that assertion does not make sense to me.... I have a few observations to support that:
One, religiously speaking, if I understand correctly, Judaism does not assert that humans are born either good or bad, but with a capacity for both and are responsible for their own choices.
Another: One thing conservatives and libertarians complain about is liberals wanting government regulations on business. Liberals are (broadly speaking) suspicious of letting industries "police themselves" or "regulate themselves" Why would they be pro-regulation if they thought human nature was good?
Another: Conservatives seem to be creating quite an alliance with/developing an admiration for: Libertarians. Libertarians (broadly speaking) want as much freedom as possible. Conservatives lately are talking about "freedom" a lot. How does one champion personal freedom if one thinks human nature is bad?
So... I am not convinced that conservatives think human nature is bad. I am really not convinced that liberals think human nature is good.
I think liberals may be more likely to have sympathy for people (even in cases where one could argue it is not warranted or reasonable), and conservatives are more likely to be demanding of people (even in cases where one could argue it is not warranted or reasonable)... but I don't think that is quite in alignment with thinking human nature is good or bad.
Great video, but I think you could do to invest some more powered rails on that hill at 3:25.
You watch Whatifalthist?
Yup! One of my favorite channels, very interesting. My main disagreement with him is that I like plato more than he does but other than that he's a brilliant guy.
Cool. You kind of sound like him in a way. I noticed you likely referenced his "Five Extreme Societies" video here. @@redeemedzoomer6053
@@redeemedzoomer6053 That’s your main disagreement with him? I thought it would be something about religion. His version of Christianity is bizarre to say the least.
@@bigboineptune9567 you're right that is a much bigger disagreement. I guess the reason I didn't mention that is because that's not one of the things he teaches. He doesn't teach his religion on his channel, but he does teach many other ideas of his, including not really liking Plato.
Whatifslthist needs to cited his sources better, but he certainly has interesting takes
9:18 You didn't leave a link in the description, as you said you might, but I'm almost sure you're speaking of Jonathan Haidt, who isn't religious but of a Jewish background. I think he's politically moderate.
I think he made a lot of good points. But I think he missed something saying that liberals don't care about "authority, loyalty, and purity"
The things I am going to say I have read elsewhere, but I do not have the names, links, or references, sorry:
For liberals:
LOYALTY is demonstrated by their dedication to defending people who have been silenced or oppressed. That is their perceived ingroup, those are the people they are loyal to.
Any violation of separation of church and state, or any imposition of religion on anyone, is viewed as a violation of PURITY.
Secular democracy and use of government defending of human rights is regarded as legitimate AUTHORITY.
So... I have read those counter arguments elsewhere, and find them convincing. I do not think Jonathan Haidt, for all his good points, is correct in saying that liberals do not value a concept of loyalty, purity, or authority. But they do attend to very different things when looking for legitimate ways of expressing loyalty, protecting purity, and accepting/obeying authority.
BGM is a little loud. Tone it down a bit.
Does anyone know the professor that did the thought experiment with the apron?
Bro is literally Christian Ben Shapiro
Will you open this Minecraft server for more players to enter?
Eventually
Conservativism is a form of liberalism, fundamentally they disagree on nothing
?
@@TheWoodlandSeamstress my comment is above yes
@@soulplexis I'm confused, yes
@@TheWoodlandSeamstress about what tho
@@soulplexis what do you mean
I tink u use creative