Lol. I like my Jungian archetypes. I mean, the original Star Wars trilogy was amazing. But some people seem to have a need for what I'll charitably call deeper meaning in their lives. Simple dismissal of religious or dogmatic thought may not be the wisest thing. Maybe.
-
-
-
For me, Peterson advocates for personal responsibility. That message is so important, if he wants to tell Bible stories while presenting it, well so be it.
-
I mean the Bible just seems like a story. And a story seems to be most simple way to transmit information to large groups of people. This story seems packed with moral and ethical guidance, depending on interpretation. Remain skeptical but to say there is no value seems wrong.
-
We don't have to say that something has no value to say that it is not rational & evidence-based. Peterson says this explicitly. He calls it the affective (feelings) truth of the mythic world (narratives).
-
I think my contention is the implication of saying something is irrational and lacks evidence. Usually it is implied there is no value and/or it is false. Or even that hyper rationality is preferable, which i am starting to disagree with.
-
There can be lots of value in feelings and stories. That's why I devoted my academic career to studying the Christian narrative and the meaning it had for women historically. It's just different to truth established by evidence & reason & the problem arises when this is denied.
-
I think you put it better in that tweet. It is a different truth and different evidence. Those words are just so loaded, saying something irrational is almost always an insult. But you are %100 right it is not the same.
-
No, it's not truth and there is no evidence. Emotionally resonant narratives are important to us and they are how we consistently think about morality and psychology and emotion and relationships. But they are not true. Bible stories are not true. Jungian archetypes are not true.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I think ur, not so subtle swipe at Jordan Peterson is a mistake. The archetypes provide moral structure without requiring literal belief in a personal God.
-
Yes, I know but I'm not claiming it doesn't do that. I'm claiming it is not rational and evidence-based, as does he. He calls it the affective reality of the mythic world -feelings produced by stories.
-
Yes but radical PoMo feminist ideas are destructive in that as JBP would say, “they deconstruct the nature of being.” Why make positive ideas equivalent with horrible ideas? Provable or not. Sorry if I’m missing you.
-
I'm not making the ideas equivalent. I'm saying the same epistemology about truth being constructed by narratives is used by pomo and Peterson. I didn't make either of them do that. I just observe that they do.
-
Do you think truth can not be expressed in story?
-
Truth and falsity can be conveyed in a narrative. It's important to establish which they are if you can. If you can't, don't claim them to be true. Just say they have meaning for you if they do.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This may even suggest that not all atheist disbelief is rooted in skepticism and a demand for good reasons for their beliefs. Instead, maybe "atheist" is just a contrarian identity,.
-
Of course, it's not. Most of the atheists I know in England are atheists because they've never been raised with any religion and never thought of taking one up. Only a small minority are sceptics. It could be contrarian if you are surrounded by religious people, I suppose.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This is so true. There's a huge difference between an atheist and a sceptic it seems
-
sadly not, at some point Sceptics became just as tribal and prone to bullshit as all the other groups. There's no where in the English language left for the truly independant minded. Unless we reclaim some word they've moved beyond. Natural Philosopher is going free..?
-
I hope all the
#ListenAndBelieveButOnlyToPeopleWhoAgreeWithUs 'sceptics' will abandon the label in the same way the SocJus loons have begun to move away from the word 'liberal.' -
Them moving away from Liberal since last year has made me really happy. Because it means I get say I'm a Liberal. Instead of having to preface it with not quite perfect adjectives.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.