Hello Paul! I'm tuning in from Germany. I find your content to be absolutely fascinating. I have watched an awful lot of Peterson and have seen or read a lot of the videos and books you referred to and thanks to you I can reflect on them again, see connections and fill in gaps. I really like your style, I think you are a really good speaker. Maybe sometimes you get a little bit heated as Peterson does to. I'm really glad and thankful that you are doing this TH-cam videos. Please continue!
I am so pleased you have come onto this scene. I, like many, came to Peterson this past year and now to you. I truly hope in times to come, that both of you can share a screen or a stage and have a face to face dialogue. You may be from a small church, but your mind is expansive. Thank you.
Also from popular culture, there are phrases that the UK produces in their BBC shows like 'Deep in the heart of England lives a legend' or 'two sides of the same coin.' They spark lively interaction among people that develop into fandoms. If it is true that we shouldn't be creating our own value structures like Nietzche hoped, then we would have to understand what our fathers and our mothers have been telling us all these years. Even if there are circumstances of absentee fathers, there would be some sort of father figure in that person's life.
Thanks for taking the time to do these videos. As a West Michigan RCA Hollander, I appreciate your insight and interpretation of Peterson's interpretation of the Bible. I don't know if he has ever revealed whether he personally believes it to be the inspired word of a living God, or whether he just deeply respects it as a pillar of western civilization and psychologically relevant to people who are looking for meaning in their lives. At first I was annoyed by this. Now, I think it is a big part of why he has come to be (as somebody put it) a "gateway drug to Christianity" - he is a bridge between faith and reason, acceptable to those approaching from either side. Keep up the good work.
Paul, this video is a prolegomena to your channel. Worthy to watch for the channel newcomers. I'm with your channel for more than two years and find your early videos very revealing. Thank you for your venture.
I have enjoyed listening to JP work , especially with maps of meaning and the biblical stories. . I could, like JP and your self explain my personal reasons. But like your self, JP and many people following these materials we are asking similar questions. What i appreciate with listening to you and JP is a genuine and authentic questioning. I am not Christian but have grown up in historically Christian country. So I need to understand the wisdom behind my culture. But at a deeper level there are more profound meanings in such ancient teachings. should not be rejected. I think we would be missing out on so much. I appreciate your talks.
Pastor Paul, thank you. I’ve really truly enjoyed your insight. So wonderful. I’ve had really negative experiences with pastors and I find it overwhelmingly inviting to listen to you.
Paul - 2017 has been the year of Jordan Peterson for me. And discovering your effort here to “sort yourself out” on the topic of belief is absolutely wonderful. Please keep it up.
Wow. Fantastic. Engaging; could not stop listening. Long, yes. Too long? Nope! I'm about the same age as you and JBP. Aquiring humility, knowledge from Jordan and you, Paul.
The best place I've found on the internet to discuss Jordan B. Peterson lectures is on the Facebook Group: "The Jordan B Peterson Liberal discussion group". The contributing members seem relatively intelligent, and you'll probably enjoy trying to apply Jordan's techniques for getting people to listen to the Bible.
JohnPaul Adamovsky Heretic! The party boat is where the top lobsters go. After that it's the Study group. Then the liberal discussion group. Allto this is if you don't get invited to the secret Advanced study group.
I really appreciate the way that you are un-packing Peterson's videos and particularly, how you are addressing the question of God and Christ in a specific way that Peterson doesn't. Please keep sharing your thoughts!!
These videos are so helpful my only criticism is that they are quite long. If you can find a way to break them up in series of 30 minutes that would be much appreciated . On the other hand I see the difficulty of that request. Anyhow many many thanks!
Yeah. What really sucks is to see a problem and not know how to beat it, maybe yet, that's the hope. (What a terrible sentence but it makes sense in my head.) I'm just now watching the Rubin Report with the Weinstein brothers and I'm feeling very red-pilled. That's not a short conversation and I'm having the experience of wanting to share it, digest it, but not wanting it to be short because I want more. I'm really trying to get a handle on all this stuff but when I sit down in the flash of a moment I see things that I know (because I work in public speaking/teaching/preaching) that to lay this stuff out would take me hours and hours because that is what it took for me to figure it out, so to walk through it all with someone is a bit nuts. This is of course where YT comes in as a tool because we've never had this kind of capacity before. I teach a 2 hours format class to a very small group sometimes and they take it, but I know with a larger groups long format is dicey. I can't tell you about how many times preachers have the length conversation about sermons. So man, I'm feeling you with this comment. If it's not fun at the receiving side, I can tell you it's even more not fun at the producing end, especially when I feel this compulsion to do this stuff in very limited time windows that I have. Sucks to be me. :)
@@PaulVanderKlay I gently disagree, not least of which because I enjoy listening to things while I'm working on the yard or whatever and I don't mind listening to long things more than once. My initial reaction to Leo's request was "God gave you a pause button!" but of course he's not asking you to cut the file into smaller pieces but to cut the ideas into smaller pieces... that's hard work. Perhaps you could do another youtube account for shorter videos, but that'd be substantially more work and I don't know how effective that'd be. I'm loving every minute of this cultural moment RE: Jordan Peterson, your analysis and the discussion of your analysis, and my own Catholic tradition in reaction to EVERYTHING. The world is awash in beauty. Keep at it, keep on it, and I'll keep after it. God gave you to us, my friend.
Could you share a reading list of the books you mentioned or would recommend for further study? I got hold of C S Lewis’ “Miracles”, and “The Happiness Hypotheses” by Haidt - a reading list could help.
As a young man I loved Nietzsche! At last as a Roman Catholic, I can embrace Nietzsche once again... Also you should mention the counter-reformation and the writings of the Saints who I know you must enjoy.. From Aquinas to Saint Augustine to Saint Therese of Lisieux and the great Jesuit writer Karl Rahner. So much information! hominem unius libri timeo! Bless you! Mike
Organic inspiration means that unlike the Synopic gospels where we have witnesses to the resurrected Lord but we don't have very clear personal details on the authorship historically speaking the most important witness and earliest we have historically to the resurrection is Paul, who we know a lot about. Here is a video that walks through the evidence. th-cam.com/video/ay_Db4RwZ_M/w-d-xo.html
Paul VanderKlay thanks again for the video Paul. That is interesting and very curious. What I found really striking was towards the end where Dr. Habermas says the majority of doubters are emotional doubters, so even evidence doesn't convince them. He did that research with a clinical psychologist, and JBP is a clinical psychologist and he's making all these doubters reconsider their doubts. The majority are emotional doubters, so JBP's rational arguments can't be what is changing them. What is JBP doing to change their minds, without even having the specific goal of converting doubters? Habermas mentioned C. S. Lewis as one of the emotional doubters. I remember from one of your other videos that one of the last things to happen to Lewis before he believed again was Tolkien told him to reconsider world mythological stories and Christianity in that context (or told him something like that). That's sorta what JBP is doing, but that still sounds like a rational argument. How is JBP convincing doubters to at least reconsider (-and I have to assume causing a fair number of them to convert-)? Edit: Actually I don't have to assume. A survey done on the Jordan Peterson subreddit shows that a significant percentage of respondents who were agnostic/atheist changed from agnostic/atheist to some from of Christian (largely Catholic) after watching JBP, a lot more than changed from some form of Christian to agnostic/atheist. You can view the results here: www.reddit.com/r/JordanPeterson/comments/7m8iw9/rjordanpeterson_general_survey_results_ii_the/
Hi Paul,I am also an emerging JP fan, with a 27 year reformed background, but recently moving into the Pentecostal world after a brief intro back in college. It is a search for the logos, expressed in reality, exercised by faith, supported by hope.I liked a previous insight you had about God moving in a new medium, (TH-cam, internet). I also enjoyed how you bracketed JP with Lewis and other writers from your background. I am a simple engineer, poet-philosopher, student of theology, dad of 5, called as a chosen, adopted, child of God to know the Messiah and make him known. I also like how you see the current debate as a 300 year progression coming to a crisis. Yes, the Catholics will have say to think they had it right all along, but got misguided in the dark ages. My current challenge moving to Pentecostalism is the premise that God did not stop reforming the "Catholic" church with the reformation, nor with the Westminster confession. Did God continue with the Baptist movement, Wesleyan-holiness, Adventist - end times, and in 1915ish Pentecostal - Holy Spirit? All in the effort to move the church back to power and spirituality as seen in the primitive ACTS church? Or does the church evolve with science and reason and really become purely psychological, in the 21st century, with arch types and self realization? Yet, even JP pauses when asked if God exists. It is such a short step from where he takes us: depravity, sacrifice, > worship.I have a Pastor friend in SoCo, Bob Bjerkaas near Laguara Hills, (Church in the Canyon), I hope you meet up.Dan
This is the 3rd video of yours I've watched and I'm really relating to most of your analysis. What Jordan Peterson is doing in his lectures on the Bible is to engage questions of purpose, meaning, connection, and dare I say inspiration. Obviously this is what religious leaders endeavor to do also. It's obvious that people will always be curious in these areas, and we need more people to be willing to shed romantic ideas from the past while acknowledging the role of these ideas in our development as a culture. I applaud you for not going beyond that to insist that Bible stories are more than allegory. We are fortunate in this moment to have nearly infinite sources of information to add to our search for meaning. The future of religion depends on broadening it's perspective rather than pretending no new data is valid.
Hi Paul, I'm a diehard athiest but find your material thoroughly enjoyable. Please continue. You're very good at clarifying and explaining both Weinstein and Peterson's ideas. I fall on the side of Weinstein myself, but can see the value of what Peterson is doing. Looking forward to your next ramble. ;-)
A thing cannot exist without it's opposite. The question of "the problem of evil" might just as well have been called the "problem of good", were it not that people are drawn to imagine an ideal world. A much better question is the "problem of existence", why not nothing? And using the opening statement, Is it perhaps Non-existence (as something real) that necessarily gives rise to existence..
your statement is imprecise, a tree can exist without it's opposite. (where do I find an anti-tree?) In fact, a measurement or perspective or opinion or conclusion cannot "BE" without the knowledge of and differentiation from it's polarity. Not all things exist in polarity. I have a son, what is his opposite?
I'm a Christian in Indonesia and I have been following your uploads, isn't that magic? What does that mean? Haha... Truly appreciate your insights. Have been a fan of Peterson and finding gems in his lectures all the time. Like most people today, I'm agnostic. Looking back at how I grew up and how I became what I am now in my surrounding and what I do, I should be an atheist and a Sam Harris fan, but I'm certainly not. I find holes in him because even though I don't really practice Christianity (as in the mainstream conservative way), I highly appreciate it. Like I appreciate all religions and cultures. But I never really understand why, beside their positive logical teachings (ones that are obvious), and I can never articulate my reasons for respecting religions to others who are very dismissive towards them. So, thank bloody goodness for Peterson and people like you!
(59:35) Buddhism have very good understanding about your elephant/rider metaphor, - but you have to do the work (there is a huge difference between "to be familiar with" and "to have acknowledged something").
Thanks so much for this! The majority of the Christians I rub shoulders with (including pastors) have disregarded Peterson due to his lack of being explicitly "Christian." I'm very encouraged to see one taking him seriously!
re. 48:00 "its striking peterson is telling people theyre a mess" Yes! peterson has many good qualities for a teacher but the one which sets him apart most from everyone else is his ability to describe the darkness of my soul. and with precision not with dumb generalities like "we have all sinned". Ive never heard anything like it. Least of all in the local churches, all of which i, a lifelong atheist, have been exploring since discovering jbp. Theyre all trying to give the solution, but to what!? jbp is the only person who is thoroughly articulating the problem. So to the question what churches have to learn fron jbp this is number one on my list.
"His ability to describe the darkness of my soul" - i relate to that. I always figured i was a good guy. non violent, polite in person, helpful... but the way he reminds us that our potential is so much grater than what we are, and the way he spotlights our worst psychological demons. It makes me look at those dark corners of my mind, and at least acknowledge they are a real part of me.
Johannes Rehnström This is my FAVORITE JP rant. He says something in here that I’ve always thought. It’s not that I am surprised bad thing happen so often , but that they don’t happen more often. “It’s a bloody miracle the lights are still on......Surprised when I go out each day and everything’s not on fire.” th-cam.com/video/eGVZt8IKQ74/w-d-xo.html
+Chad McCoy ecxellent clip. It hits many of his main themes in a condensed space. One thing that really strikes me is the disagreeable tone. eg he explains the human condition in terms like "you are terrible but if you try real hard you can be ever so slightly less of a wretch." I think this plays a part in his popularity because it resonates with an audience that our fake-happy culture normally doesnt speak to. Its delightful!
I appreciate the valued service you are giving us connecting JBP and psychological science with the Old and New Testament. Myself I take the statement "It is finished" to mean that, after letting us try to come back into relationship with God (and to get out of this "time out sitting on the stairs😹) by our own power or even with the guidance of a bunch of laws, Jesus Christ came down to us, and said in effect , "Here let me take the hit, and by showing you what love really can be, I will be the way, and nobody gets back in except through me - I decide what is in the heart." So since the cross and resurrection, the law is dead to me, it's only Jesus now, living inside me that inspires me, and law as a motivation is nothing in comparison. And consequently religion and "Christianity " dissolve, but there is still a church, and it is a church for everyone who is willing to respond to it. How does this mesh with your thoughts? You seem to me to be someone working like this within the constitution and confines of your denomination as best you can.✨😺💫
Subscribed - Hi Paul I'm Tom it was great to discover your channel. Until I discovered Dr. Jordan Peterson I thought I was alone. Now I know there are hundreds of thousands like me. I realized JP was moving the ball forward when I started watching his 2017 Personality Lecture series and my mind was blown by a six-minute analysis of Neitzsche. Search on "Jordan Peterson: Avoid this deadly trap". Thanks again.
I think religion, just like any collection of ideas, can be twisted and used for evil (nazi germany is one example) - similar to anythin else intended for good purposes. I think videos like this and the journey of Jordan Peterson put the good intentions and complex ideas forth from a non-biased perspective. I like when intelligent people discuss the ideas and try yo enhance the 'good' aspects. It feels like Christianity is getting a much needed upgrade thanks to these discussions.
Thank you for this talk / lecture and companion piece to Peterson's material. Your explanation and dissection is very compact and comprehensible and I was pleasantly surprised to find this video while searching for JP content. Well done. Subscribed.
I think I actually love this man... How is it possible that some of the most intelligent people have such glaring blindspots. It really forces one to reevaluate ones perspective of absolutely everything, uncomfortably disorienting.
You talk like Peterson, and me being a Calvinist, it’s like you interpret him in a beautiful Biblical way. Can’t help but wonder if this is the tung speech interpretation it’s about in Acts. This is really cool. Been a Christian the most of my life and this is helping me out of the box.
An student-intern gave it to me as a thankyou gift years ago. I'll look at it more closely. It is a picture of Jesus made up of lots of other famous faces.
Heidegger spent a lot of time trying to answer the free throw question. It is common knowledge that the most skilled know increasingly less and less about how they are doing something. This puts us in a strange position.
I loved what you said about God moves in all of the lives of the Bible characters, and in you and me. It reminds me of the philosopher GW Hegel who Chomsky says wrote a lot of nonsense in so far as he has read him, and I have not tried to decipher Hegel either, but an economics professor teaching (and this will get JBP into a tizzy 😹) the theories of Karl Marx, said that Hegel believes if we all step back and take a high level view of every learning, experience and relationship, both CONSCIOUS and UNCONSCIOUS, it points us all to one singularity of TRUTH. And for me this is Jesus Christ.
The issue with Hegel was his materialist progressivism I think. Christian eschatology and providence clearly have their own idea of progressivism too. Hegel right now in some thinking Christian circles is a persona non grata. Fascinating.
Dear Paul, I, too, am one who finds Jordan Peterson saying something important, and am not quite sure why. What your series is doing (this is the third one I've watched) is explaining to me in rich detail why.
That's a bit of a simplistic idea of the Catholic Church's idea of Scripture in relation to the Church. The Church understands Scripture and Tradition to be Ecclesial in the sense that its inspiration derives from the Holy Spirit's assistance of the first Christ-willed Church leaders, the Apostles (and their Co-workers that helped them in this, like Luke, Mark, Jude) in carrying out the mission that Christ gave them in the great commission (as it is stated at the end of Matthew for instance) to preach the Gospel to all nations and to teach his doctrine ("teach them to obey all I have commanded you"). Church leaders, as we can see from the letters to Timothy and Titus were given authority to continue the great commision's command to preach and teach. They did this both on the authority of the books left by the Apostles (the New Testament) the Scriptures of Israel (Old Testament) and the teaching and training that the Apostles and their co-workers had given them personally. And there is this difference, they considered the fundamental content of the faith to have been transmitted to them from the Apostles, "the deposite of faith once and for all handed down to the saints" so whatever they said had to be based in and not contradict the heritage left by the Apostles. The New Testament was discerned as part of that Apostolic heritage, it was not invented by the Church latter on (again it was written by the Church's earliest leaders though). At first, even though it was considered authoritative as something the Apostles left, it was rarely ever called Scripture by the Apostolic Fathers like Ignatius, Clement and Justin, until the time of Iraeneus, they in fact refer more to the teachings being handed on from the Apostles, their congregations and they themselves having heard at first or second hand from the Apostles themselves. It took a certain distance before it was called Scripture (there is a rare instance even in NT where Peter uses the word for St. Paul's letters, but such usage is rare) which they used regarding the OT, and cannonicity thoroughly discussed (if you had heard teaching and preaching from strait from the Apostles lips, would you value that more or the book they left? as much as you would also value the second). But Catholics do consider it the inspired and innerant word of God as part of the Apostolic heritage and as part of the irreplaceable foundations the Apostles lay down, so what the Church in latter days says must not contradict this (and can't when it is most solemnly exercised because of the Lord's promise to preserve the Church from the "gates of Hades") but must base its self on this, as well as the rest of the Apostolic heritage.
Hello. I had to stop the video when you said that Nietzsche encourages what happened in Nazi Germany. And I can't continue watching untill you tell me why do you say that. Can you please do that?
The Nazis found encouragement in Nietzsche's idea of the superman. It wasn't Nietzsche's fault. They found encouragement in lots of ideas. The Nazis were responsible for their own stuff.
Religion as a failed science was popularised by the anthropologist J.G. Fraser in his book 'The Golden Bough'. Wittgenstein's comment on Fraser "Fraser is much more savage than all his savages. His explanation of primitive practices are much more cruder than the meaning of these practices themselves." applies equally to all the new atheists like Harris and Dawkins.
I watched this video and regretfully, I think it reflects that you know practically nothing about Dr. Jung's oeuvre. In fairness, you said practically nothing about Dr. Jung, so I'd have to say that the title was a come on, which captured me long enough to listen to it. I do think that the fact that you are drawn to Dr. Peterson's work suggests that you know deep down that something new must emerge from religion, and it may be useful for us to engage on this. I'm sure it happens to me as well, but when you get ripping on these very long rants, a lot of the sterile arguments that go on in religious discussion get mixed in with your apparent perplexity over why Jordan Peterson is so popular. Quite simply, it is apparent that many are searching for a new way to engage with their "spiritual" side. Again, I must commend to your attention the essay by Dr. Thomas Arzt, which is found in _Jung's Red Book for Our Time: Searching for Soul Under Postmodern Conditions_. Once you have done that, we might have something to talk about.
Thanks for your comment. Guilty as charged. Before Peterson's videos I knew next to nothing about Jung except a negative reputation among conservative Christians. I'm working through Jung's autobiography and finding it fascinating. Thanks for the pointer. I'll look it up. www.amazon.com/Jung%60s-Red-Book-Our-Time/dp/1630514772
As you probably know, Dr. Jung was the son of a Reformed Pastor, who had lost his faith. Dr. Jung spent his lifetime exploring this & found the Living God in stead.
Jung had that dream after his father's death. Jung in his autobiography (up to where I am so far) had a rough time with his father. That deeply impacted him no doubt, and the his father died young.
Part of what makes me nervous about having a large following on TH-cam is exactly what your comment raises. I am no expert in Nietzsche (I struggle to spell his name correctly every time!) or Jung. I know some things but even so I'm a pastor not a scholar. Pastors are generalists who have to navigate a broad variety of demands and therefore can't really "go deep" on any one thing. In some ways we're like elementary school teachers, not college professors. At the same time I want to be helpful with what I've got and what I can do so I will do my best. I have to stay humble and willing to listen to others who know more about particular things than I do. Ego is a challenge. I don't know what Jung had to say about that. So thanks for your comment. My reading list is expanding through this adventure even as my time for reading (because I'm making videos) is decreasing. Such is life. :)
Paul Vanderklay Let me uncloak for a moment, so as to seem more personable to you, and less anonymous. You, Sir, are a precious find, so please do not be put off at the first sign of intellectual engagement. There is absolutely nothing that depends upon this except the future of humanity, literally, so please hang in there! I have read into video major portions of Dr. Arzt's essay, and the first few segments of Dr. Jung's Red Book, so that you can see what I mean. I will put the link below the fold, so that you won't mistake me as a troll. On the contrary, I think the fact that you have engaged Jordan Peterson at all is a very important sign, and the first sentence of Dr. Arzt's essay says why: "A specter haunts our world today; its name is Angst. Small wonder ...." Of course, conservative Christians have had it in for Dr. Jung nearly since the beginning, which is not news, but I ignore them after they taught my daughter to say, after a lovely 22nd Birthday dinner involving only the two of us, "Dad, I hate to say this, but I think you're going to Hell." In my immediate experience I was then plunged into Hell, and it has taken me nearly 20 years to climb out. That very night, in a psychogenic event, Mephistopheles himself plopped into the seat beside me in my car on the way home, and I cut the Faustian bargain. In my case, I agreed that on my death he could have my immortal Soul, provided that none of my daughters would think that about me during my lifetime. Only Dr. Jung offered me a lifeline. So, I think there is very much more to talk about, and I think a Pastor willing to engage someone as erudite as Jordan Peterson, regardless of how "humble," is the perfect person to have that discussion. If you spend only as much time as I have spent listening to you this afternoon, perhaps you will see the value too. As I said, Dr. Jung found the Living God, not a divinity school cookbook ghost version of that. In order to do that, you need to listen to the first 5 short videos on my Red Book playlist, which I will link here at the end. By the way, Dr. Jung had several dreams about his Father after his death, some of them fairly amusing, particularly the one after his Mother's death, but I digress. You can communicate with me directly and not in public via skip.conover@gmail.com Here is the opening to the playlist: th-cam.com/play/PLQZQUs-Hx3L1HytsVqwdieRvfa7SISp7z.html
Hello Paul: I think I understand what you refer to as "organic revelation": God working in and thru history. I don't know what practical vision for future events this allows us to predict. The people that followed Jesus, including Paul, believed the 2nd coming was imminent. If this revelation is a faith statement, OK. But predictive teleology is a tricky thing. The most I can say is that God will not let evil go unrestricted for too long. The fear of unrestricted evil is a gateway to sloth and hopelessness. Like Peterson has said, the level of meanings in the Bible are inexhaustible. While God's ways in the world are mysterious: He can do what He wants, how He wants, when He wants. He is not a whimsical presence that one can't get to know. It's a relational thing. This drives many kinds of non-believers daffy. This unpredictability of God's ways are reflective of the uncanniness of this relation to the divine. It reinforces a relation to Being that requires more than a casual, or careless comportment. How to describe the numinous: He's really smart -- Yeah ; He's got a lot of influence over events - Yeah ; He's a family man - Yeah ; He really loves people -- I am sure, Yeah ; He's not to be approached in a flip, disrespectful way --- Oh yeah, this can be detrimental to your well - being. All these descriptions reflect the limitation of our own being. True by Analogy , or the result of our linguistic and conceptual limitation. Some would say illusion. God is all this and more. this is what making predictions based on revelation tricky. Maybe this accounts for what seems like outrageous images and symbols in Revelation. I don't know what the upshot to this post is, except to understand denominational biases. Also maybe the pretension of claiming to know how God is doing his business by reflecting on what History, Science, Philosophy is unfolding
Peterson is at a level that makes sure little fish like me get filtered out. It's a lamentable reality of time and space. So often its the friends you have before the crowd finds you that you can maintain. Status is a real issue quickly. I'd like to see Peterson talk to Tim Keller. :)
Paul VanderKlay I appreciate your humility. But if God wants you to talk to him or to use this youtube, He will equip you :). Btw, JBP will be joining a discussion with William Lane Craig in Toronto in January so that will be very interesting!
Perhaps our genes are amoral, but i think that morality is derived from them, to claim that morality does not give us an evolutionary advantage, or is somehow detached from evolution is absurd. Morality in my view is a set of rules adhered to that become ingrained in a culture over time, It is exactly like any other biological function, except that it is forged inside of the rather abstract landscape of our minds. It may seem suffocating, but we cannot escape the paradigm of natural selection, (if we regard natural selection as a statistical principal, inherent to existence).
According to Jung, God was dead for Nietzsche because he became ego inflated; He secretly thought he was god which is why he identified with the superman and rejected the ugliest man in Thus spoke Zarathustra. The ugliest man is the shadow or human weakness, selfishness etc. he thought he was sole creator of his writing and it's power to influence people was attributed by him to be from himself. Jung thought that the creative artist was the secretly the religious mouthpiece for our values, but Nietzsche had no psychological knowledge and self understanding. Jung wrote the the polarization Nietzsche's writing was a premonition and symptom of the kind of polarized thinking such shadow projection, split mindedness which were the cause of the first and second world wars. The religious values and images are lost and the world wars were the result. It is clear that the superman and ugliest man are religious values like good and bad, etc. The creative artist is really secretly the mouthpiece of such values for the collective, but who often becomes inflated by indentifying with the creative source, the imagination which is really impersonal, something like revelation. The same old values come out but in new form but the meaning is the same which would shows why Harry pottery films are so popular. With shadow projection, only the superman is thought to have value, but the ordinary man, and weak man who is flawed is to be rejected and of course there are not any perfect people, but only God.
yes. but my first critical question when approaching religion is: why don't any of them work? there must be a systemic flaw. but we do need a new way of going about it - and your lectures give good food for thought about this. do you comment anywhere about peterson's view of the gender issues? as a woman, I find his ideas on this creepy and I wonder how you
Your second question relates to your first one. Part of why we get balled up in it is because we are involved in "gender". It's like talking about yourself. It always gets messy because you're you. We might ask "what is gender?" or "what is gender for?" There is male and female, masculine and feminine. Masculine and feminine are of course constructs far more than male and female. We adapted language ("gender" use to be mostly a grammatical term not an so much human identity, every English language high school student of Spanish asked "why is mesa/table feminine" for which the teacher had no good answer) to talk about relationships between men and women and we quickly found offense.
If we want to understand the "son of man", we have to understand the Jews, for he was a Jew, as well as being the "Son of G-d". I only did a home study "O" level course on psychology; but Mr Peterson is a professional. Watch Ariel Cohen Alloro, he is a messianic Yeshua believing Jew. Peace be with you.
People aren’t particularly individualistic. They are simply confused. If they were individualistic they would at least seek to become the best version of themselves, which would lead them away from this ‘be yourself’ nonsense.
JP's got ALL the right stuff, even the awesome ideology of "living as if the bible is true"! But he doesn't have faith. (Yet) If he doesn't accept Jesus he is actually as dangerous to all those people pledging undying allegiance to him -as they already are -then he is doing good. I am not 'uncertain' about this anymore -i am presently finding all the confirmation i need to realize that he does not believe in Christ yet, and this is a problem if many people idolize him. He is, after all, no more intellectual than a 90s academic, God bless his heart! (..furthermore..or in reflection,I think JP, unwittingly or not, is the spokesmen for a culture shift, perhaps one desperately seeking for a voice?)
Weinstein and "top level" truth. See Jordan's friend Jonathan Pageau's 8min video. "The Question of Truth - Answer to Bret Weinstein from the Joe Rogan Podcast with Jordan Peterson."
I also follow Jung away from nietzsche, why? because I am a recovering alcoholic, that has not drank since april 19, 1986. a lifetime ago, eh wot? I had to re-subscribe to Gott's grace.
I do think it is a big jump between pantheism and identity politics. I think you're just naming two things you don't like, two things that you don't understand, and insisting that there's a connection there! Most genderqueer people I know are strict atheists, not pantheists. You're looking for a presence of optimistic pantheism in my generation and it's not there, because I'm trying to make it happen and I can't. They are way too depressed, they are far too jaded by years of scandals in religious communities. This is the generation that loves Bojack Horseman, came into adulthood after the 08 crash and are headed for an Earth where they all die from global warming. Any feel-good optimism, pantheist or otherwise, is not coming from them but from a media industry, which by its nature as a business, can't say anything that would scare advertisers. It's not that they think that they are God and God is them that they think they're allowed to invent new identities. It's because they looked at their parents' generation, saw they were trapped in unhappy marriages and saw no traditional religious authority in sight and said "oh, are you using this future? You're not? Do you mind if I do?"
This material is fantastic. Between you and Peterson, I feel like I'm drinking water from a fire hose.
I feel like I'm bathing in fine scotch... can't... drink... it.. all...
I feel like it's fire from a water hose
Hello Paul! I'm tuning in from Germany. I find your content to be absolutely fascinating. I have watched an awful lot of Peterson and have seen or read a lot of the videos and books you referred to and thanks to you I can reflect on them again, see connections and fill in gaps.
I really like your style, I think you are a really good speaker. Maybe sometimes you get a little bit heated as Peterson does to.
I'm really glad and thankful that you are doing this TH-cam videos. Please continue!
I am so pleased you have come onto this scene. I, like many, came to Peterson this past year and now to you. I truly hope in times to come, that both of you can share a screen or a stage and have a face to face dialogue. You may be from a small church, but your mind is expansive. Thank you.
Dont change your approach. Too much polishing of your thoughts, will tend come off as "fake". TH-cam is best when it feels "real".
me darby I completely agree. Keep it raw.
I'll 3rd that! You are loved!
Love you, brother! Great stuff and great style.
What a nice guy you seem to be, sir. I'll start bench watching your stuff. Thanks for putting all this content out! :)
Also from popular culture, there are phrases that the UK produces in their BBC shows like 'Deep in the heart of England lives a legend' or 'two sides of the same coin.' They spark lively interaction among people that develop into fandoms. If it is true that we shouldn't be creating our own value structures like Nietzche hoped, then we would have to understand what our fathers and our mothers have been telling us all these years. Even if there are circumstances of absentee fathers, there would be some sort of father figure in that person's life.
+1 subscriber please continue with this kind of work
Thanks for taking the time to do these videos. As a West Michigan RCA Hollander, I appreciate your insight and interpretation of Peterson's interpretation of the Bible. I don't know if he has ever revealed whether he personally believes it to be the inspired word of a living God, or whether he just deeply respects it as a pillar of western civilization and psychologically relevant to people who are looking for meaning in their lives. At first I was annoyed by this. Now, I think it is a big part of why he has come to be (as somebody put it) a "gateway drug to Christianity" - he is a bridge between faith and reason, acceptable to those approaching from either side.
Keep up the good work.
Your point on the divorce between the physical world and the relational world is very good.
Paul, this video is a prolegomena to your channel. Worthy to watch for the channel newcomers.
I'm with your channel for more than two years and find your early videos very revealing.
Thank you for your venture.
I have enjoyed listening to JP work , especially with maps of meaning and the biblical stories. . I could, like JP and your self explain my personal reasons. But like your self, JP and many people following these materials we are asking similar questions. What i appreciate with listening to you and JP is a genuine and authentic questioning. I am not Christian but have grown up in historically Christian country. So I need to understand the wisdom behind my culture. But at a deeper level there are more profound meanings in such ancient teachings. should not be rejected. I think we would be missing out on so much. I appreciate your talks.
Pastor Paul, thank you. I’ve really truly enjoyed your insight. So wonderful. I’ve had really negative experiences with pastors and I find it overwhelmingly inviting to listen to you.
Keep up the amazing work.
This is refreshing.
Paul - 2017 has been the year of Jordan Peterson for me. And discovering your effort here to “sort yourself out” on the topic of belief is absolutely wonderful. Please keep it up.
Wow. Fantastic. Engaging; could not stop listening. Long, yes. Too long? Nope!
I'm about the same age as you and JBP. Aquiring humility, knowledge from Jordan and you, Paul.
Nice articulation between the fast moving lines. Thanks!
Brilliant! Thank you for your "unpacking" and comments.
The best place I've found on the internet to discuss Jordan B. Peterson lectures is on the Facebook Group: "The Jordan B Peterson Liberal discussion group". The contributing members seem relatively intelligent, and you'll probably enjoy trying to apply Jordan's techniques for getting people to listen to the Bible.
JohnPaul Adamovsky Heretic! The party boat is where the top lobsters go. After that it's the Study group. Then the liberal discussion group. Allto this is if you don't get invited to the secret Advanced study group.
@@Dcypha77 I'm on double-secret probation from the secret advanced illuminati discussion study committee. I'm so proud of my shame!
I really appreciate the way that you are un-packing Peterson's videos and particularly, how you are addressing the question of God and Christ in a specific way that Peterson doesn't. Please keep sharing your thoughts!!
These videos are so helpful my only criticism is that they are quite long. If you can find a way to break them up in series of 30 minutes that would be much appreciated . On the other hand I see the difficulty of that request. Anyhow many many thanks!
Yeah. What really sucks is to see a problem and not know how to beat it, maybe yet, that's the hope. (What a terrible sentence but it makes sense in my head.)
I'm just now watching the Rubin Report with the Weinstein brothers and I'm feeling very red-pilled. That's not a short conversation and I'm having the experience of wanting to share it, digest it, but not wanting it to be short because I want more.
I'm really trying to get a handle on all this stuff but when I sit down in the flash of a moment I see things that I know (because I work in public speaking/teaching/preaching) that to lay this stuff out would take me hours and hours because that is what it took for me to figure it out, so to walk through it all with someone is a bit nuts.
This is of course where YT comes in as a tool because we've never had this kind of capacity before. I teach a 2 hours format class to a very small group sometimes and they take it, but I know with a larger groups long format is dicey. I can't tell you about how many times preachers have the length conversation about sermons.
So man, I'm feeling you with this comment. If it's not fun at the receiving side, I can tell you it's even more not fun at the producing end, especially when I feel this compulsion to do this stuff in very limited time windows that I have. Sucks to be me. :)
@@PaulVanderKlay I gently disagree, not least of which because I enjoy listening to things while I'm working on the yard or whatever and I don't mind listening to long things more than once. My initial reaction to Leo's request was "God gave you a pause button!" but of course he's not asking you to cut the file into smaller pieces but to cut the ideas into smaller pieces... that's hard work. Perhaps you could do another youtube account for shorter videos, but that'd be substantially more work and I don't know how effective that'd be.
I'm loving every minute of this cultural moment RE: Jordan Peterson, your analysis and the discussion of your analysis, and my own Catholic tradition in reaction to EVERYTHING. The world is awash in beauty.
Keep at it, keep on it, and I'll keep after it. God gave you to us, my friend.
@@PaulVanderKlay also, please shorten your comments😶🙃🙂
Could you share a reading list of the books you mentioned or would recommend for further study?
I got hold of C S Lewis’ “Miracles”, and “The Happiness Hypotheses” by Haidt - a reading list could help.
As a young man I loved Nietzsche! At last as a Roman Catholic, I can embrace Nietzsche once again...
Also you should mention the counter-reformation and the writings of the Saints who I know you must enjoy.. From Aquinas to Saint Augustine to Saint Therese of Lisieux and the great Jesuit writer Karl Rahner. So much information!
hominem unius libri timeo!
Bless you!
Mike
Hey Paul, I'm curious where exactly were you going from 1:12:20-1:12:40. Can you do a quick summary of that idea?
Organic inspiration means that unlike the Synopic gospels where we have witnesses to the resurrected Lord but we don't have very clear personal details on the authorship historically speaking the most important witness and earliest we have historically to the resurrection is Paul, who we know a lot about. Here is a video that walks through the evidence. th-cam.com/video/ay_Db4RwZ_M/w-d-xo.html
Paul VanderKlay thanks!
Paul VanderKlay thanks again for the video Paul. That is interesting and very curious.
What I found really striking was towards the end where Dr. Habermas says the majority of doubters are emotional doubters, so even evidence doesn't convince them. He did that research with a clinical psychologist, and JBP is a clinical psychologist and he's making all these doubters reconsider their doubts. The majority are emotional doubters, so JBP's rational arguments can't be what is changing them. What is JBP doing to change their minds, without even having the specific goal of converting doubters?
Habermas mentioned C. S. Lewis as one of the emotional doubters. I remember from one of your other videos that one of the last things to happen to Lewis before he believed again was Tolkien told him to reconsider world mythological stories and Christianity in that context (or told him something like that). That's sorta what JBP is doing, but that still sounds like a rational argument. How is JBP convincing doubters to at least reconsider (-and I have to assume causing a fair number of them to convert-)?
Edit: Actually I don't have to assume. A survey done on the Jordan Peterson subreddit shows that a significant percentage of respondents who were agnostic/atheist changed from agnostic/atheist to some from of Christian (largely Catholic) after watching JBP, a lot more than changed from some form of Christian to agnostic/atheist. You can view the results here:
www.reddit.com/r/JordanPeterson/comments/7m8iw9/rjordanpeterson_general_survey_results_ii_the/
Thanks for yet another great video! You are rising some very good points.
Hi Paul,I am also an emerging JP fan, with a 27 year reformed background, but recently moving into the Pentecostal world after a brief intro back in college. It is a search for the logos, expressed in reality, exercised by faith, supported by hope.I liked a previous insight you had about God moving in a new medium, (TH-cam, internet). I also enjoyed how you bracketed JP with Lewis and other writers from your background. I am a simple engineer, poet-philosopher, student of theology, dad of 5, called as a chosen, adopted, child of God to know the Messiah and make him known. I also like how you see the current debate as a 300 year progression coming to a crisis. Yes, the Catholics will have say to think they had it right all along, but got misguided in the dark ages. My current challenge moving to Pentecostalism is the premise that God did not stop reforming the "Catholic" church with the reformation, nor with the Westminster confession. Did God continue with the Baptist movement, Wesleyan-holiness, Adventist - end times, and in 1915ish Pentecostal - Holy Spirit? All in the effort to move the church back to power and spirituality as seen in the primitive ACTS church? Or does the church evolve with science and reason and really become purely psychological, in the 21st century, with arch types and self realization? Yet, even JP pauses when asked if God exists. It is such a short step from where he takes us: depravity, sacrifice, > worship.I have a Pastor friend in SoCo, Bob Bjerkaas near Laguara Hills, (Church in the Canyon), I hope you meet up.Dan
This is the 3rd video of yours I've watched and I'm really relating to most of your analysis. What Jordan Peterson is doing in his lectures on the Bible is to engage questions of purpose, meaning, connection, and dare I say inspiration. Obviously this is what religious leaders endeavor to do also. It's obvious that people will always be curious in these areas, and we need more people to be willing to shed romantic ideas from the past while acknowledging the role of these ideas in our development as a culture. I applaud you for not going beyond that to insist that Bible stories are more than allegory. We are fortunate in this moment to have nearly infinite sources of information to add to our search for meaning. The future of religion depends on broadening it's perspective rather than pretending no new data is valid.
Really appreciate you taking the time, so far getting a traditional pastor to engage with this content is like pulling teeth.
Hi Paul, I'm a diehard athiest but find your material thoroughly enjoyable. Please continue. You're very good at clarifying and explaining both Weinstein and Peterson's ideas. I fall on the side of Weinstein myself, but can see the value of what Peterson is doing. Looking forward to your next ramble. ;-)
A thing cannot exist without it's opposite. The question of "the problem of evil" might just as well have been called the "problem of good", were it not that people are drawn to imagine an ideal world.
A much better question is the "problem of existence", why not nothing? And using the opening statement, Is it perhaps Non-existence (as something real) that necessarily gives rise to existence..
It is everything and nothing. - Charles Manson
your statement is imprecise, a tree can exist without it's opposite. (where do I find an anti-tree?) In fact, a measurement or perspective or opinion or conclusion cannot "BE" without the knowledge of and differentiation from it's polarity. Not all things exist in polarity.
I have a son, what is his opposite?
captainmaim just because you can’t answer a question does not mean there is no answer.... smh
This analyzation on Peterson talks should never end. Very refreshing to find another perspective on Jordan's lectures
I'm a Christian in Indonesia and I have been following your uploads, isn't that magic? What does that mean? Haha... Truly appreciate your insights. Have been a fan of Peterson and finding gems in his lectures all the time. Like most people today, I'm agnostic. Looking back at how I grew up and how I became what I am now in my surrounding and what I do, I should be an atheist and a Sam Harris fan, but I'm certainly not. I find holes in him because even though I don't really practice Christianity (as in the mainstream conservative way), I highly appreciate it. Like I appreciate all religions and cultures. But I never really understand why, beside their positive logical teachings (ones that are obvious), and I can never articulate my reasons for respecting religions to others who are very dismissive towards them. So, thank bloody goodness for Peterson and people like you!
Very, very good. I would like to see an interview with you and Jordan Peterson.
Superb, enlightening stuff. Thank you sir
(59:35) Buddhism have very good understanding about your elephant/rider metaphor, - but you have to do the work (there is a huge difference between "to be familiar with" and "to have acknowledged something").
Thanks so much for this! The majority of the Christians I rub shoulders with (including pastors) have disregarded Peterson due to his lack of being explicitly "Christian." I'm very encouraged to see one taking him seriously!
"Why does the relational world matters so much?"
fundamental question; thank you!
re. 48:00 "its striking peterson is telling people theyre a mess"
Yes! peterson has many good qualities for a teacher but the one which sets him apart most from everyone else is his ability to describe the darkness of my soul. and with precision not with dumb generalities like "we have all sinned".
Ive never heard anything like it. Least of all in the local churches, all of which i, a lifelong atheist, have been exploring since discovering jbp.
Theyre all trying to give the solution, but to what!? jbp is the only person who is thoroughly articulating the problem.
So to the question what churches have to learn fron jbp this is number one on my list.
Johannes Rehnström have you listened to the outtake of him talking about oppression?
"His ability to describe the darkness of my soul" - i relate to that. I always figured i was a good guy. non violent, polite in person, helpful... but the way he reminds us that our potential is so much grater than what we are, and the way he spotlights our worst psychological demons. It makes me look at those dark corners of my mind, and at least acknowledge they are a real part of me.
+Chad McCoy probably but Im not sure. Link it?
Johannes Rehnström This is my FAVORITE JP rant. He says something in here that I’ve always thought. It’s not that I am surprised bad thing happen so often , but that they don’t happen more often. “It’s a bloody miracle the lights are still on......Surprised when I go out each day and everything’s not on fire.”
th-cam.com/video/eGVZt8IKQ74/w-d-xo.html
+Chad McCoy ecxellent clip. It hits many of his main themes in a condensed space.
One thing that really strikes me is the disagreeable tone. eg he explains the human condition in terms like "you are terrible but if you try real hard you can be ever so slightly less of a wretch." I think this plays a part in his popularity because it resonates with an audience that our fake-happy culture normally doesnt speak to. Its delightful!
Minnesotan Therapist/Drug Counselor here, thank you for helping to translate the Bible Series!
I appreciate the valued service you are giving us connecting JBP and psychological science with the Old and New Testament. Myself I take the statement "It is finished" to mean that, after letting us try to come back into relationship with God (and to get out of this "time out sitting on the stairs😹) by our own power or even with the guidance of a bunch of laws, Jesus Christ came down to us, and said in effect , "Here let me take the hit, and by showing you what love really can be, I will be the way, and nobody gets back in except through me - I decide what is in the heart."
So since the cross and resurrection, the law is dead to me, it's only Jesus now, living inside me that inspires me, and law as a motivation is nothing in comparison. And consequently religion and "Christianity " dissolve, but there is still a church, and it is a church for everyone who is willing to respond to it.
How does this mesh with your thoughts? You seem to me to be someone working like this within the constitution and confines of your denomination as best you can.✨😺💫
Subscribed - Hi Paul I'm Tom it was great to discover your channel. Until I discovered Dr. Jordan Peterson I thought I was alone. Now I know there are hundreds of thousands like me. I realized JP was moving the ball forward when I started watching his 2017 Personality Lecture series and my mind was blown by a six-minute analysis of Neitzsche. Search on "Jordan Peterson: Avoid this deadly trap". Thanks again.
I think religion, just like any collection of ideas, can be twisted and used for evil (nazi germany is one example) - similar to anythin else intended for good purposes. I think videos like this and the journey of Jordan Peterson put the good intentions and complex ideas forth from a non-biased perspective. I like when intelligent people discuss the ideas and try yo enhance the 'good' aspects. It feels like Christianity is getting a much needed upgrade thanks to these discussions.
You got a subscriber here. This is a wonderful video.
Thank you for this talk / lecture and companion piece to Peterson's material. Your explanation and dissection is very compact and comprehensible and I was pleasantly surprised to find this video while searching for JP content. Well done. Subscribed.
I think I actually love this man... How is it possible that some of the most intelligent people have such glaring blindspots. It really forces one to reevaluate ones perspective of absolutely everything, uncomfortably disorienting.
Love these, thank you so much!!
You talk like Peterson, and me being a Calvinist, it’s like you interpret him in a beautiful Biblical way. Can’t help but wonder if this is the tung speech interpretation it’s about in Acts. This is really cool. Been a Christian the most of my life and this is helping me out of the box.
Don't apologize at the end! You Did end powerfully!✨😺💫
Whats the name of the painting of Jesus on the wall to your right?
Enjoy these videos very much, please keep it up!
An student-intern gave it to me as a thankyou gift years ago. I'll look at it more closely. It is a picture of Jesus made up of lots of other famous faces.
Brilliant stuff!
why is there a religious symbol in Harris' portrait?
Good question.
Irony?
10/10, will share :D
Great topic!
Heidegger spent a lot of time trying to answer the free throw question. It is common knowledge that the most skilled know increasingly less and less about how they are doing something. This puts us in a strange position.
Only watched this now from South Africa. I wish you were my pastor. Would have made things a lot easier😂
Thank you for these videos. You encourage my lazy brain to think, and I consider that a good thing.
I loved what you said about God moves in all of the lives of the Bible characters, and in you and me. It reminds me of the philosopher GW Hegel who Chomsky says wrote a lot of nonsense in so far as he has read him, and I have not tried to decipher Hegel either, but an economics professor teaching (and this will get JBP into a tizzy 😹) the theories of Karl Marx, said that Hegel believes if we all step back and take a high level view of every learning, experience and relationship, both CONSCIOUS and UNCONSCIOUS, it points us all to one singularity of TRUTH. And for me this is Jesus Christ.
The issue with Hegel was his materialist progressivism I think. Christian eschatology and providence clearly have their own idea of progressivism too. Hegel right now in some thinking Christian circles is a persona non grata. Fascinating.
Dear Paul, I, too, am one who finds Jordan Peterson saying something important, and am not quite sure why. What your series is doing (this is the third one I've watched) is explaining to me in rich detail why.
That's a bit of a simplistic idea of the Catholic Church's idea of Scripture in relation to the Church. The Church understands Scripture and Tradition to be Ecclesial in the sense that its inspiration derives from the Holy Spirit's assistance of the first Christ-willed Church leaders, the Apostles (and their Co-workers that helped them in this, like Luke, Mark, Jude) in carrying out the mission that Christ gave them in the great commission (as it is stated at the end of Matthew for instance) to preach the Gospel to all nations and to teach his doctrine ("teach them to obey all I have commanded you"). Church leaders, as we can see from the letters to Timothy and Titus were given authority to continue the great commision's command to preach and teach. They did this both on the authority of the books left by the Apostles (the New Testament) the Scriptures of Israel (Old Testament) and the teaching and training that the Apostles and their co-workers had given them personally. And there is this difference, they considered the fundamental content of the faith to have been transmitted to them from the Apostles, "the deposite of faith once and for all handed down to the saints" so whatever they said had to be based in and not contradict the heritage left by the Apostles. The New Testament was discerned as part of that Apostolic heritage, it was not invented by the Church latter on (again it was written by the Church's earliest leaders though). At first, even though it was considered authoritative as something the Apostles left, it was rarely ever called Scripture by the Apostolic Fathers like Ignatius, Clement and Justin, until the time of Iraeneus, they in fact refer more to the teachings being handed on from the Apostles, their congregations and they themselves having heard at first or second hand from the Apostles themselves. It took a certain distance before it was called Scripture (there is a rare instance even in NT where Peter uses the word for St. Paul's letters, but such usage is rare) which they used regarding the OT, and cannonicity thoroughly discussed (if you had heard teaching and preaching from strait from the Apostles lips, would you value that more or the book they left? as much as you would also value the second). But Catholics do consider it the inspired and innerant word of God as part of the Apostolic heritage and as part of the irreplaceable foundations the Apostles lay down, so what the Church in latter days says must not contradict this (and can't when it is most solemnly exercised because of the Lord's promise to preserve the Church from the "gates of Hades") but must base its self on this, as well as the rest of the Apostolic heritage.
Holy shit, Paul, you da man! Superman!
Hello. I had to stop the video when you said that Nietzsche encourages what happened in Nazi Germany. And I can't continue watching untill you tell me why do you say that. Can you please do that?
The Nazis found encouragement in Nietzsche's idea of the superman. It wasn't Nietzsche's fault. They found encouragement in lots of ideas. The Nazis were responsible for their own stuff.
ahh It sounded the other way in your video. That is more accurate. thanks
You seem to have left out eastern and oriental orthodoxy which had nothing to do with the reformation other than not replying to Luther's letters.
The JBP convo is mostly an in house Western church/civ convo. The bigger the frame the more dynamics to include the tougher to maintain focus.
You keep sneaking up on me Paul. I think he biases toward camping/feels better on a ‘side’.
Religion as a failed science was popularised by the anthropologist J.G. Fraser in his book 'The Golden Bough'. Wittgenstein's comment on Fraser "Fraser is much more savage than all his savages. His explanation of primitive practices are much more cruder than the meaning of these practices themselves." applies equally to all the new atheists like Harris and Dawkins.
I watched this video and regretfully, I think it reflects that you know practically nothing about Dr. Jung's oeuvre. In fairness, you said practically nothing about Dr. Jung, so I'd have to say that the title was a come on, which captured me long enough to listen to it. I do think that the fact that you are drawn to Dr. Peterson's work suggests that you know deep down that something new must emerge from religion, and it may be useful for us to engage on this. I'm sure it happens to me as well, but when you get ripping on these very long rants, a lot of the sterile arguments that go on in religious discussion get mixed in with your apparent perplexity over why Jordan Peterson is so popular. Quite simply, it is apparent that many are searching for a new way to engage with their "spiritual" side. Again, I must commend to your attention the essay by Dr. Thomas Arzt, which is found in _Jung's Red Book for Our Time: Searching for Soul Under Postmodern Conditions_. Once you have done that, we might have something to talk about.
Thanks for your comment. Guilty as charged. Before Peterson's videos I knew next to nothing about Jung except a negative reputation among conservative Christians. I'm working through Jung's autobiography and finding it fascinating. Thanks for the pointer. I'll look it up. www.amazon.com/Jung%60s-Red-Book-Our-Time/dp/1630514772
As you probably know, Dr. Jung was the son of a Reformed Pastor, who had lost his faith. Dr. Jung spent his lifetime exploring this & found the Living God in stead.
Jung had that dream after his father's death. Jung in his autobiography (up to where I am so far) had a rough time with his father. That deeply impacted him no doubt, and the his father died young.
Part of what makes me nervous about having a large following on TH-cam is exactly what your comment raises. I am no expert in Nietzsche (I struggle to spell his name correctly every time!) or Jung. I know some things but even so I'm a pastor not a scholar. Pastors are generalists who have to navigate a broad variety of demands and therefore can't really "go deep" on any one thing. In some ways we're like elementary school teachers, not college professors.
At the same time I want to be helpful with what I've got and what I can do so I will do my best. I have to stay humble and willing to listen to others who know more about particular things than I do. Ego is a challenge. I don't know what Jung had to say about that.
So thanks for your comment. My reading list is expanding through this adventure even as my time for reading (because I'm making videos) is decreasing. Such is life. :)
Paul Vanderklay Let me uncloak for a moment, so as to seem more personable to you, and less anonymous. You, Sir, are a precious find, so please do not be put off at the first sign of intellectual engagement. There is absolutely nothing that depends upon this except the future of humanity, literally, so please hang in there! I have read into video major portions of Dr. Arzt's essay, and the first few segments of Dr. Jung's Red Book, so that you can see what I mean. I will put the link below the fold, so that you won't mistake me as a troll. On the contrary, I think the fact that you have engaged Jordan Peterson at all is a very important sign, and the first sentence of Dr. Arzt's essay says why: "A specter haunts our world today; its name is Angst. Small wonder ...." Of course, conservative Christians have had it in for Dr. Jung nearly since the beginning, which is not news, but I ignore them after they taught my daughter to say, after a lovely 22nd Birthday dinner involving only the two of us, "Dad, I hate to say this, but I think you're going to Hell." In my immediate experience I was then plunged into Hell, and it has taken me nearly 20 years to climb out. That very night, in a psychogenic event, Mephistopheles himself plopped into the seat beside me in my car on the way home, and I cut the Faustian bargain. In my case, I agreed that on my death he could have my immortal Soul, provided that none of my daughters would think that about me during my lifetime. Only Dr. Jung offered me a lifeline. So, I think there is very much more to talk about, and I think a Pastor willing to engage someone as erudite as Jordan Peterson, regardless of how "humble," is the perfect person to have that discussion. If you spend only as much time as I have spent listening to you this afternoon, perhaps you will see the value too. As I said, Dr. Jung found the Living God, not a divinity school cookbook ghost version of that. In order to do that, you need to listen to the first 5 short videos on my Red Book playlist, which I will link here at the end. By the way, Dr. Jung had several dreams about his Father after his death, some of them fairly amusing, particularly the one after his Mother's death, but I digress. You can communicate with me directly and not in public via skip.conover@gmail.com Here is the opening to the playlist: th-cam.com/play/PLQZQUs-Hx3L1HytsVqwdieRvfa7SISp7z.html
thank you!
Hello Paul:
I think I understand what you refer to as "organic revelation": God working in and thru history. I don't know what practical vision for future events this allows us to predict. The people that followed Jesus, including Paul, believed the 2nd coming was imminent. If this revelation is a faith statement, OK. But predictive teleology is a tricky thing. The most I can say is that God will not let evil go unrestricted for too long. The fear of unrestricted evil is a gateway to sloth and hopelessness. Like Peterson has said, the level of meanings in the Bible are inexhaustible. While God's ways in the world are mysterious: He can do what He wants, how He wants, when He wants. He is not a whimsical presence that one can't get to know. It's a relational thing. This drives many kinds of non-believers daffy.
This unpredictability of God's ways are reflective of the uncanniness of this relation to the divine. It reinforces a relation to Being that requires more than a casual, or careless comportment. How to describe the numinous: He's really smart -- Yeah ; He's got a lot of influence over events - Yeah ; He's a family man - Yeah ; He really loves people -- I am sure, Yeah ; He's not to be approached in a flip, disrespectful way --- Oh yeah, this can be detrimental to your well - being. All these descriptions reflect the limitation of our own being. True by Analogy , or the result of our linguistic and conceptual limitation. Some would say illusion. God is all this and more. this is what making predictions based on revelation tricky. Maybe this accounts for what seems like outrageous images and symbols in Revelation.
I don't know what the upshot to this post is, except to understand denominational biases. Also maybe the pretension of claiming to know how God is doing his business by reflecting on what History, Science, Philosophy is unfolding
I question all these philosophers who focus solely on biblical truth without even mentioning eastern spiritual beliefs.
You need to talk to JBP! I don’t know why but Jonathan Pageau does not resonate with me.
Peterson is at a level that makes sure little fish like me get filtered out. It's a lamentable reality of time and space. So often its the friends you have before the crowd finds you that you can maintain. Status is a real issue quickly. I'd like to see Peterson talk to Tim Keller. :)
Paul VanderKlay
I appreciate your humility. But if God wants you to talk to him or to use this youtube, He will equip you :). Btw, JBP will be joining a discussion with William Lane Craig in Toronto in January so that will be very interesting!
Perhaps our genes are amoral, but i think that morality is derived from them, to claim that morality does not give us an evolutionary advantage, or is somehow detached from evolution is absurd.
Morality in my view is a set of rules adhered to that become ingrained in a culture over time, It is exactly like any other biological function, except that it is forged inside of the rather abstract landscape of our minds.
It may seem suffocating, but we cannot escape the paradigm of natural selection, (if we regard natural selection as a statistical principal, inherent to existence).
According to Jung, God was dead for Nietzsche because he became ego inflated; He secretly thought he was god which is why he identified with the superman and rejected the ugliest man in Thus spoke Zarathustra. The ugliest man is the shadow or human weakness, selfishness etc. he thought he was sole creator of his writing and it's power to influence people was attributed by him to be from himself. Jung thought that the creative artist was the secretly the religious mouthpiece for our values, but Nietzsche had no psychological knowledge and self understanding. Jung wrote the the polarization Nietzsche's writing was a premonition and symptom of the kind of polarized thinking such shadow projection, split mindedness which were the cause of the first and second world wars. The religious values and images are lost and the world wars were the result. It is clear that the superman and ugliest man are religious values like good and bad, etc. The creative artist is really secretly the mouthpiece of such values for the collective, but who often becomes inflated by indentifying with the creative source, the imagination which is really impersonal, something like revelation. The same old values come out but in new form but the meaning is the same which would shows why Harry pottery films are so popular. With shadow projection, only the superman is thought to have value, but the ordinary man, and weak man who is flawed is to be rejected and of course there are not any perfect people, but only God.
Dude....u look like an older David Pakman
yes. but my first critical question when approaching religion is: why don't any of them work? there must be a systemic flaw. but we do need a new way of going about it - and your lectures give good food for thought about this.
do you comment anywhere about peterson's view of the gender issues? as a woman, I find his ideas on this creepy and I wonder how you
Your second question relates to your first one. Part of why we get balled up in it is because we are involved in "gender". It's like talking about yourself. It always gets messy because you're you. We might ask "what is gender?" or "what is gender for?" There is male and female, masculine and feminine. Masculine and feminine are of course constructs far more than male and female. We adapted language ("gender" use to be mostly a grammatical term not an so much human identity, every English language high school student of Spanish asked "why is mesa/table feminine" for which the teacher had no good answer) to talk about relationships between men and women and we quickly found offense.
If we want to understand the "son of man", we have to understand the Jews, for he was a Jew, as well as being the "Son of G-d".
I only did a home study "O" level course on psychology; but Mr Peterson is a professional. Watch Ariel Cohen Alloro, he is a messianic Yeshua believing Jew.
Peace be with you.
People aren’t particularly individualistic. They are simply confused. If they were individualistic they would at least seek to become the best version of themselves, which would lead them away from this ‘be yourself’ nonsense.
JP's got ALL the right stuff, even the awesome ideology of "living as if the bible is true"! But he doesn't have faith. (Yet) If he doesn't accept Jesus he is actually as dangerous to all those people pledging undying allegiance to him -as they already are -then he is doing good. I am not 'uncertain' about this anymore -i am presently finding all the confirmation i need to realize that he does not believe in Christ yet, and this is a problem if many people idolize him. He is, after all, no more intellectual than a 90s academic, God bless his heart! (..furthermore..or in reflection,I think JP, unwittingly or not, is the spokesmen for a culture shift, perhaps one desperately seeking for a voice?)
Weinstein and "top level" truth. See Jordan's friend Jonathan Pageau's 8min video.
"The Question of Truth - Answer to Bret Weinstein from the Joe Rogan Podcast with Jordan Peterson."
I also follow Jung away from nietzsche, why? because I am a recovering alcoholic, that has not drank since april 19, 1986. a lifetime ago, eh wot? I had to re-subscribe to Gott's grace.
I do think it is a big jump between pantheism and identity politics. I think you're just naming two things you don't like, two things that you don't understand, and insisting that there's a connection there! Most genderqueer people I know are strict atheists, not pantheists. You're looking for a presence of optimistic pantheism in my generation and it's not there, because I'm trying to make it happen and I can't. They are way too depressed, they are far too jaded by years of scandals in religious communities. This is the generation that loves Bojack Horseman, came into adulthood after the 08 crash and are headed for an Earth where they all die from global warming. Any feel-good optimism, pantheist or otherwise, is not coming from them but from a media industry, which by its nature as a business, can't say anything that would scare advertisers.
It's not that they think that they are God and God is them that they think they're allowed to invent new identities. It's because they looked at their parents' generation, saw they were trapped in unhappy marriages and saw no traditional religious authority in sight and said "oh, are you using this future? You're not? Do you mind if I do?"
I also admire the Jews for their ability to exist despite the whole world hating them.