Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Today I am breaking my weekend silence.

I have transcribed the above embedded video for your information. I find this video quite extraordinary. There are many reasons for this, but the one that is most prevalent in my mind is how well it explains the two different approaches taken to Francis’ “Joy of Sex” document. But more on that further below.

Next, it fits nicely with yesterday’s post about how the post-conciliar church effective transformed the Sacred Priesthood into a clique of social workers.

So by providing an overview of how our understanding of the concept of the Articulated Truth has been developing in the secular philosophical and psychological sub-set of the et Invisibilium, from Nietzsche to Jung, Freud and Kierkegaard, we can clearly see that what Dr. Peterson is doing is clearly enouncing what the Catholic Faith has been teaching us since it’s founding by Our Lord.

Which in turn allows us to ask the neo-Modernists and the post-Modernists the following question: Can the evolutionary process of our understanding of the Articulated Truth as has developed from Nietzsche to Jung, Freud and Kierkegaard be incorrect?

The Battle For Your Mind – What Is Truth?

Which allows us to further reduce the question to: if you don’t believe Our Lord and you don’t now believe the secular philosophers and scientists, who do you believe?

Which nicely leads into the Spadarian “2+2=5” meme and the “magic thinking” explanation.

And finally, when we listen to Dr. Peterson, we can clearly see the ESSENSE of the issue between Francis and the Dubia Fathers. The manner in which this issue manifests itself can clearly be seen from the two diametrically opposite approaches that the two sides took in promulgating their respective positions.

Of further note is the fact that this Monday, a book will be released which purportedly relates the “state of affaris” behind the Sacred Vatican Walls. Here is the Fr. Z. post informing his readers about the release of The Dictator Pope. THe below is a good framework that should help keep at the forefront the really important things, when reading this book.

On an aside, the video also contains the best EVAHHHH takedown of the protestant sect. And this comes from a Christian who himself was raised in one of these sects. I have highlighted this part in dark blue.

Please re-watch the video and read the below and I will have more to say about this in a followup post.

*****

Christianity makes the assumption that the word of God, that pulls order out of chaos at the beginning of time, it’s the Logos, is the thing that’s Christ, you know, so many ions later.

They’re the same thing.

It’s like; well what the hell does that mean?

Well it’s like, if you embody the immortal soul properly, you’re the thing that generates order from chaos. Or sometimes the reverse. You make… you’re the transforming agent that sits at the middle of order and chaos.

Ok, to that’s the same thing that was there at the beginning. That’s the beginning of being, not the beginning of the universe. That’s the beginning of being, that’s not the same thing.

So… and the Christians figure out that this Logos thing is very much associated with articulated truth. Articulated Truth. And so the Christian idea in part is…and this is where Nietzsche had it wrong, I think… because he was… was… he was too cynical about Osyrus, he was too cynical about Christianity. He thought all it was , was rotten infrastructure. You know, so he saw how it had become dogmatized and corrupted across time, but he didn’t see what was in the center of it. And his superman was sort of a substitute for that. But he never flushed that out well.

But Jung started to play with the superman idea, and with the idea of the philosopher stone, and he was studying Christianity and at one point he says… oh, oh… those are the same thing. They’re all the same thing. It’s complicated but one of the things that Jung recognized was that the core doctrine of Christianity in some sense is : the Truth buttresses you most thoroughly against the vicissitudes of being. That’s your salvation. The Truth. The spoken Truth.

It’s not… So you might say, … people say… Christians say, if you believe in Christ you are saved.

Well, what do you mean by believe?

Exactly?

You say, Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And you say: I believe that.

Just because you say that, that doesn’t mean that you believe that at all. It has no bearing on what you believe.

The question is: HOW DO YOU ACT?

And the fundamental question under all that is: is your speech true?

Well, then you might ask, what does true mean?

Well, and the answer to that would be, they’re twofold. What are you trying to do with your speech? There are two things you can do with your speech.

One is, you can manipulate reality so that it does what you want it to do.

And so, that’s the kind of speech people use when they are trying to get what they want. The problem with that is that is, that there is no way… they can’t actually know what they want. They just hypothesize what it is that they want based on some theory. And then they try to manipulate the world so that they get that. It’s a non satisfying venture and often when they do get it, it’s not good anyways. So and it involves a kind of falsity of speech.

The other way is to try to say what you mean and think and perceive as clearly as you possibly can always and see what happens.

Now the story that underlies Christianity, and it’s not only Christianity, but it’s Christianity that I am most familiar with, is that.

The rule is, live in accordance with the truth and see what happens.

So in the Sermon on the Mount for example, Christ basically says: Set your sights on allegiance to God. It’s like, whatever the highest value we’ll say. And act in a manner that’s concordant with that. So that’s your goal. Then pay attention to the here and now. Your best strategy for the future.

Well, you know, then you might say, prove that?

Well, that’s when the question starts to become existential. Well it’s like, you can’t prove it. You have to try it. That’s like Kierkegaard’s leap of faith. You cannot tell if this works unless you do it. And that’s a commitment.

It’s like, those two ways of being, the manipulative way of being, that’s an adversarial way of being, archetypically. It’s manipulative. It’s got the LIE at it’s core.

That’s completely different than this path.

So it’s a hypothesis. It’s a hypothesis that Jung did a good job of elaborating. Although even with Jung, it’s not fully articulated. He still saturated an image to a large degree. But no wonder, it’s very complicated to make this sort of thing fully articulated.

You read Solzhenitsyn, you think, why did the Soviet Union become the absolute hellhole that it was. Solzhenitsyn says: because everyone LIED. Oh, isn’t that interesting. Well, that isn’t the hypothesis that you here every day.   

So then you think about Freud and you think, well what’s the major cause of mental illness? Repression. Well, that’s a LIE, fundamentally. I mean, Freud’s played around with it to some degree, so… it’s sort of like, it’s more like… LYING  by omission, actually than lying by commission. But it doesn’t matter. It’s still LYING.

Jung says the same thing. It’s like, wouldn’t it be interesting if fundamental root of psychopathology is was the LIE? The fundamental root of political psychopathology is the LIE?

It’s like, well, what if that’s what’s demolishing your life?

You know, people say… people think especially when they’re NIHILISITC, and they become destructive, that the universe is sort of, it’s unfair and arbitrary place and it’s bent on their destruction, while they suffer. It’s something like that. Yea, right.

What do you do under those circumstances? That’s the question.

Well, one potential answer is: twist the thing so that you can  maybe get what you hypothetically want to get out of it.

The other is, rely on your perceptions and your capacity for accurate representation.  Communicate that, and take your chances.

It’s like, who’s right?

Well, that’s the battle between Good and evil.

Who’s right?

It’s a continual battle.