Genuine qn. How can we ever be sure a methodology or system does NOT also contain the natural blind spot of its creator?
-
-
-
It always does but it becomes irrelevant if and only if it is 100% objectively verifiable. Example: Taleb. Since this excludes a lot of thinkers, the second best option is to understand that bias and take it into account, which in itself is a fine exercise in self-understanding
-
What if my own bias cause me to miss the bias of the creator/methodology? genuine qn. And also I’m thinking out loud at same time...
-
This means simply that you are unaware of you projecting your own bias, and therefore miss it as such in others or their work. Cognitively we are all biased because we all perceive and judge reality with a different set of tools, or functions. One of the things Jung understood.
-
The question has to do with undwerstanding the limitations of your bias, not eliminating it, which besides being fundamentally impossible as it is hardwired, is also not preferable or a real solution. The moment you judge, your bias happens automatically.
-
>The moment you judge, your bias happens automatically I fully agree with this. Genuine qn. What do u think might be urs in your original tweet on few able to realise natural blind spot and articulate a system instead?
-
I am a individualist by nature, and an extreme one at that, therefore I am blind to the growth process that others (at least 1/2 of population) derive from engaging with humanity at the level of the group. I do not perceive groups—I only perceive individuals (& their dynamics).
-
Said differently, my bias is my inability to perceive global values and address them on any level. This is the reason I insist in most I express on individual values, but this, of course, is not how everyone perceives it. What I lack, someone like Peterson lives by & vice versa.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I'm going to have to disagree with this. Guru's are not necessarily teachers, (Jung was a teacher) because he had a program and a curriculum which was to be applied. Guru's, on the other hand, are about resonance. so they do break down their own psychology to relate.
-
Your statement is factually wrong, as Jung neither considered himself a teacher (being reluctant to formalize his theories until very late in life and under pressure from others) nor did he ever formally teach.
-
I understand, in what state did more of his knowledge aid people? Through the guru understanding of self or through its educational formatting?
-
Jung is an anomaly and none of those apply. He synthesized his awareness of both the abstract and the concrete aspects of reality in an unprecedented way. To understand the depth of his vision and impact of his work, you must read him.
-
Our curret culture uses so many of his ideas without knowing he originated them that it's ridiculous. The real fact of his brilliance is that you are not even aware of the extent of his influence.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
We have yet to see a guru tell his audience to think for themselves, trust their own experiences, to sit in a room for an hour and get to know themselves..hmmm I wonder why? Would the absence of motivation dopamine hits in this *advice* ruin their business model?
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The fundamental problem of life is that to be conscious means to experience pain "Guru's" tend to communicate how they deal with this So it's always Lo-res (can be useful) e.g. Eckhart Tolle Jung perceived - through study - the myriad of wats humans have used to cope Hi res
-
Well said. Getting comments like these makes Twitter valuable.
-
Thanks You're putting the value out there And So, drawing it towards you A guru might say: Law of attraction ;) For me: Its good to see someone into discussing Jung!
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.