Placeholder Image

字幕列表 影片播放

  • oh

  • Hello, everyone. Thank you again for showing up, so

  • tonight

  • We're going to finish off the story of Noah and also

  • the story of

  • the Tower of Babel

  • and I don't think that'll take very long and

  • then we're going to

  • turn to the abrahamic Stories and

  • They're a very complex set of stories. They sit between

  • the

  • Earliest stories in Genesis that I would say end with the tower of babel

  • And then the stories of moses which are extraordinarily well-developed

  • Abrahamic stories, there's a whole sequence of them

  • multiple stories

  • conjoined together and

  • There I found them very daunting

  • they're very difficult to understand and

  • so

  • I'm going to stumble through them the best that I can I would say that's that's probably the best way to think about this because

  • they

  • Have a narrative content. That's quite strange

  • I

  • was reading a book while doing this called the disappearance of God that I found quite helpful, and

  • the author of that book argues that

  • one of the things that happens in the old testament is that

  • God is very manifest at the beginning

  • in terms of personal appearances even and then that

  • proclivity fades away as the old testament develops, and there's a

  • parallel development

  • That it's maybe maybe causally linked. I'm not exactly sure how to conceptualize it, but that appears to be causally linked is that?

  • the

  • Stories about individuals become more and more well-developed so it says in it's as if as God fades away, so to speak

  • the individual becomes more and more manifest and

  • There's a statement in the old testament the location of which. I don't recall

  • But I'll tell you about it in future lectures where God essentially tells

  • Whoever he's speaking with and I don't remember who that is that he's going to disappear and let man essentially go his own way

  • And see what happens not a complete disappearance, but maybe a transformations is something that

  • Modern people regard more as a psychological phenomena rather than the sort of objective entity that God seems to be in

  • the beginning of the biblical stories

  • and so I've been wrestling with that a lot because

  • the notion that

  • God, I got appears to Abraham multiple times and

  • that's not a concept that's easy for modern people to

  • to grasp in

  • for us

  • generally speaking apart from say issues of Faith

  • God is it some?

  • thing

  • someone who makes himself personally manifest in our lives

  • He doesn't appear to us

  • That's I suppose why the question of belief is so paramount for modern people

  • I presume that if God had within the habit of appearing to you you likely wouldn't have a problem with belief

  • I mean it might be more complicated than that, but that's how it seems to me, and so when we read stories about

  • God making himself manifest either to a nation say in the case of israel or to individuals

  • It's not easy to understand

  • It's not easy to understand why people would write stories like that if they thought like we thought and I mean it really it wasn't

  • That long ago that the Bible was written say from a biological perspective. It's really only yesterday

  • It's a couple thousand years say four thousand years something like that

  • That's not very long ago from a biological perspective, it's it's nothing

  • so

  • the first thing I tried to do is to

  • see if I could figure out how to understand that and so else the lecture once we finish the the

  • remains of the story of Noah, I'll start the lecture with a with an attempt to

  • Situate the abrahamic stories in a context that might make them more accessible

  • These two contexts that work for me to make them more accessible

  • Let's conclude

  • the Noah Story

  • first however when we

  • ended last time

  • The ark had come to its resting place and Noah and his family had

  • debarked

  • and

  • so this is the stories of

  • What occurs immediately after afterwards?

  • it's a very short story, but I think it's it's very relevant for

  • both

  • Of these stories the tower of babel is well very relevant for our current times and the sons of Noah

  • That went forth of the ark were shem, and ham and Japheth and ham

  • Is the father of Canaan?

  • These are the three sons of Noah and of them was the whole Earth overspread and Noah began to be a husbandman

  • and he planted a vine yard and

  • he drank of the wine and was drunken and he was uncovered within his tent and

  • Ham the father of Canaan saw the nakedness of his father and told his two brethren without?

  • and shem and Japheth took a garment and laid upon both their shoulders and went backward and

  • Covered the nakedness of their father and their faces were backward and they saw not their fathers nakedness

  • And Noah awoke from his wine and knew what his younger son

  • had done unto him and he said curse had to be Canaan a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren and

  • He said blessed shall be the lord. God of shem and Canaan Shall be his servant and God shall enlarge Japheth

  • And he shall dwell in the tents of shem and Canaan Shall be his servant

  • and Noah lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years and all the days of Noah were 950 years and he died and

  • the whole Earth was of one language and of one speech okay, so

  • I remember thinking about this story

  • It's got to be 30 years ago

  • And I think the meaning of the story stood out for me sometimes

  • When you read complicated material sometimes a piece of it will stand out. It's for some reason. It's like it glitters

  • I suppose that might be one way of thinking about it. It's

  • it

  • You're in sync with it, and you can understand what it means. I've really experienced that reading the Dao. De Jing which is document

  • I would really like to do a lecture on at some point because some of the verses

  • I don't understand but others stand right out

  • and I can understand them and I think I understood what this part of the story of Noah meant and I

  • think it means you know we talked a little bit about what nakedness meant in the story of Adam and Eve and

  • The idea essentially was that to know yourself naked is to become aware of your vulnerability

  • the physical Your physical boundaries in time and space and

  • Your your your physiological

  • your fundamental physiological

  • Insufficiencies as they mate might be judged by others, so there's biological

  • Insufficiency that sort of built into you because you're a fragile Mortal vulnerable half insane creature

  • And that's that's just an existential truth, and then of course

  • even

  • merely as a

  • Human being even with all those faults there are faults that you have that are particular to you that might be

  • judged harshly by the group

  • Well might be will definitely be judged

  • Harshly by the group and so to become aware of your nakedness is to become self-conscious and and to and to

  • Know your limits and to know your vulnerability, and that's what is

  • revealed

  • To ham when he comes across his father naked and so the question is

  • What does it mean to see your father naked and it seems to me and especially in an inappropriate Manner like this it it?

  • it's it's it's as if

  • ham

  • He does the same thing that happens in the mesopotamian creation myth

  • When when time out and absolute give rise to the first gods

  • there there the father of the eventual

  • deity of

  • redemption Marduk

  • they're very careless and noisy and they kill apps, ooh their father and

  • attempt to inhabit his corpse and that makes timeout enraged and so she

  • Bursts Forth from The Darkness to

  • To do them in it's like a precursor to the flood story or an analogue to the flood story

  • And I see the same thing happening here with ham. Is that he's is

  • insufficiently respectful of his father and

  • The question is exactly what does the father represent and you can say well there's there's?

  • There's the father that you have and that's a human being that's the demand like other men a man among men

  • but then there's the farther as such and that's the spirit of the father and

  • Insofar as you have a father you have both at the same time you have the personal father

  • That's a man among other men

  • just like anyone others father, but insofar as that man is your father that means that he's something different than just another person and

  • what he is is the

  • incarnation of the spirit of the Father and

  • to see that to take it to what to

  • Disrespect that carelessly, maybe even he's like no one makes a mistake right? He?

  • produces wine and gets himself drunk and you might say well

  • you know if he sprawled out there for everyone to see it's hardly hams fault if he stumbles across them but

  • The book is laying out a danger and the danger is that well maybe you catch your father at

  • his most vulnerable moment and if you're

  • disrespectful

  • Then you transgress against the spirit of the father and if you transgress against the spirit of father and lose

  • Spirit of the father and lose respect for the spirit of the father then that is likely to transform you into a slave

  • That's a very interesting idea and I think it's particularly interesting

  • Maybe not particularly interesting, but it's it's particularly germane. I think to our current cultural situation because I think that

  • We're pushed constantly to see the nakedness of our father so to speak

  • because of the intense criticism, that's

  • Directed towards our culture and the patriarch of culture, so to speak

  • we're constantly exposing its weaknesses and vulnerabilities and let's say nakedness and

  • There's nothing wrong with criticism, but the thing about Criticism is the purpose of criticism is to separate the wheat from the chaff

  • It's not to burn everything to the ground

  • Right, it's to say well. We're going to carefully look at this we're going to carefully differentiate

  • We're going to keep what's good and we're going to move away from what's bad

  • But the point of the Criticism isn't to identify everything is bad. It's to

  • Separate what's good from what's bad so that you can retain. What's good and move towards it and

  • And to be careless at that is deadly because you're inhabited by the spirit of the father right insofar as you're a cultural

  • Construction which of course is something that the that the postmodern neo-Marxists are absolutely?

  • emphatic about you're a cultural construction insofar as you're a cultural construction, then you're inhabited by the spirit of the father and to be

  • Disrespectful towards that means to undermine the very structure that makes you not all of what you are certainly

  • Certainly not all of what you are

  • But a good portion of what you are insofar as you're a socialized cultural entity and if you pull out

  • If you pull the foundation out from underneath that what do you have left you can hardly manage on your own?

  • You know it's just not possible. You're a cultural creation. And

  • so Ham makes this desperate

  • error and is Careless about

  • Exposing himself to the vulnerability of his father something like that. He doesn't without sufficient respect. And the judgment is that

  • not only will he be a slave, but so will all of his descendants, and he's contrasted with the other two sons who I

  • Suppose are willing to give their father the benefit of the doubt something like that, and so when they see him in a compromising position

  • they handle it with respect and and and

  • don't capitalize on it and

  • Maybe that makes them strong. That's what it seems to me, and so I think that's what that story means

  • It has something to do with respect

  • you know and the funny thing about having respect for your culture, and I suppose that's partly why I'm doing the biblical stories is because

  • They're part of a they're part of my culture

  • they're part of our culture perhaps, but they're certainly part of my culture and

  • It seems to me that

  • it's worthwhile to treat that with respect to see what you can glean from it and

  • And not kick it when it's down. Let's say

  • so

  • and so that's how the story of no ends you know and the thing too is Noah is actually a

  • Pretty decent incarnation of the Spirit of the father that which I suppose is one of the things that makes hams

  • Misstep more egregious is that I mean noah just built an ark and got everybody through the flood man

  • You know it's not so bad, and so maybe the fact that he happened to drink too much wine one day wasn't enough to justify

  • humiliating him and

  • You know I don't think it's pushing the limits of symbolic interpretation

  • To note on a daily basis that we're all contained in an ark

  • Right, and that's the ark that you could think about that as the ark that's been bequeathed to us by our forefathers. That's the

  • Tremendous infrastructure that we inhabit that we take for granted

  • Because it works so well

  • that protects us from things that we can't even imagine and we don't have to imagine because we're so well protected and

  • So one of the things that's really struck me hard. I would say about the

  • Disintegration and corruption of the universities is the absolute ingratitude that goes along with that

  • You know what?

  • Criticism as I said it's a fine thing if it's done in the spirit in a proper spirit

  • And that's the spirit of separating the wheat from the chaff, but it needs to be accompanied by gratitude

  • And it does seem to me that anyone who lives in in the west in the western culture at this time

  • in history and in this place and who hasn't

  • simultaneously grateful for that is is

  • half-blind

  • at least because it's never been better than this and

  • It could be so much worse and it's highly likely that it will be so much worse because for most of human history

  • So much worse is the norm

  • so

  • then there's this little story that

  • Crops up that seems in some ways unrelated to everything that's gone before it

  • But I think it's also an extremely profound little story it took me a long time to figure it out. It's the tower of babel

  • and it came to pass as they journeyed from the east that they found a plain in the land of shinar and dwelt there that's

  • Noah's Descendants and the whole Earth was of one language and of one speech

  • And it came to pass as they journeyed from the east that they found a plain in the land of shinar and they dwelt there

  • And they said to one another

  • Go let us make brick and burn them thoroughly and they had brick for stone and slime they head for mortar

  • So they're establishing a city and they said go let us build a city and a tower whose top may reach

  • Unto heaven and let us make a name lest. We be scattered abroad upon the face of the Earth

  • and

  • the Lord came down to see the city in the tower which the children of men built and

  • The Lord said behold the people is one and they all have one language and now this they begin to do

  • And now nothing will be restrained from them which they have imagined to do

  • Go to let us go down and there confound their language that they may not understand one another's speech

  • So the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth and they left off to build the city

  • therefore is the name of it called babel because the lord did there confound the language of all the Earth and

  • From thence did the Lord scattered them abroad

  • Upon the face of all the Earth

  • It's a very difficult story to understand and it's on the face of it. It doesn't seem to show

  • God in a very good light although that happens fairly frequently in the old testament as far as I can tell but

  • You know the thing to do if you're reading in the spirit of the text let's say is to remember that

  • It's God that you're talking about and so

  • Even though you might think that

  • He's appearing in a bad light

  • Your duty as a reader. I suppose is to assume that you're wrong and that what he did was right

  • And then you're supposed to figure out well, how could it possibly be right because the axiomatic

  • Presupposition is that it's God and whatever he does is right, and you might say well, you can disagree with that

  • And it's it's also the case that some of the people that God talks to in the old testament

  • Actually disagree with him and convinced him to alter his actions, but the point still remains that it's God and if he's doing it then

  • By definition. There's a good reason

  • There's an idea much later that John Milton develops in in

  • Paradise lost

  • Which is an amazing poem

  • And It's it's it's a it's it's a profound enough poem so that it's almost been incorporated into the biblical structure I would say so

  • the Corpus of Christianity

  • Post Milton

  • was Saturated by

  • the Miltonic stories of Satan's Rebellion none of us in the in the in the

  • Biblical texts or it's only hinted at in very brief passages and Milton wrote his poem

  • To justify the word the ways of God to man, which is quite an ambition really!

  • It's an amazing profound ambition

  • To try to produce something

  • to produce a literary work

  • That justifies being to human beings, because that's what Milton was trying to do, so one of my readers here

  • Sent me a link the other day for viewers

  • To a work of philosophy by an australian Philosopher whose name I don't remember

  • Who basically wrote a book saying that:

  • being as such, human experience, is so corrupt and so

  • Permeated by suffering that it would be better if it had never existed at all

  • sort of the ultimate expression of Nihilism and

  • Goethe in in Faust his Mephistopheles who's a Satanic character obviously has that as a credo

  • That's that Satan's fundamental motivation is

  • His objection to creation itself is that creation is so flawed and so rife with suffering that it would be better if it had never

  • existed at all and so that's his motivation for attempting to

  • continue to Destroy it but in

  • Milton's Paradise lost

  • Satan is an intellectual figure, and you see that motif emerged very frequently by the way in

  • popular culture, so for example in the lion king the figure of Skaar who's a Satanic figure is also hyper intellectual and

  • That's very common that you know it's the evil scientist motif or the or the evil advisor to the king the same motif it

  • Encapsulates something about rationality and it what it seems to encapsulate is the idea that

  • Rationality like Satan is the highest angel in God's heavenly Kingdom. It's a psychological idea. You know that the most powerful

  • Sub element of the human psyche is the intellect and and it's the thing that shines out above all

  • within the domain of humanity and maybe across the

  • Domain of life itself the human intellect there's something absolutely remarkable about it

  • but it has a flaw and the flaw is that it tends to

  • Fall in love with its own productions and to assume that their total

  • Solzhenitsyn when he was writing the Gulag Archipelago

  • had a warning about that with regards to

  • totalitarian Ideology, and he said that the price of selling your god-given soul to the entrapments of

  • human dogma was slavery and death essentially and

  • Satan

  • in Milton's Paradise Lost Satan

  • decides that

  • He can do without the transcendent he can do without God and that's why he foments rebellion

  • It's something like that and the consequence of that the immediate consequence from Milton's perspective was that as soon as Satan

  • Decided that what he knew was sufficient

  • That he could do without the transcendent which he might think about as the domain outside of what you know something like that

  • immediately he was in hell and

  • When I read Paradise lost I was studying totalitarianism, and I thought you know the poet

  • the true Poet like a prophet

  • if someone who has

  • intimations of the future

  • and maybe that's because the poetic mind the philosophical or prophetic mind is a pattern detector and

  • And there are people who can detect the underlying it's like the malady of a nation

  • Melody is in song the song of a nation and can see how it's going to develop across the centuries you see this you see

  • That Nietzsche because Nietzsche for example in the mid you know in 1860 or so. I mean he prophesied

  • What was going to happen in the 20th century said that he said specifically that the spectre of Communism would kill

  • Millions of people in the 20th century, it's amazing prophecy. He said that in the notes that became will to power and

  • Dostoyevsky was of the same sort of mind someone who was in touch enough with the fundamental patterns of

  • Human movement that they could extrapolate out into the future and see what was coming

  • and I mean some people are very good at detecting patterns you know and and uh

  • Milton, I think was of that, sort and

  • I

  • think he had intimations of what was coming as human rationality became more and more powerful and technology became more and more powerful and the

  • Information was that we would produce systems that dispensed with God

  • That were completely rational and completely total that would immediately turn everything they touched into something

  • indistinguishable from Hell, and

  • then Milton's warning was

  • embodied in the poem is that

  • the rational mind that

  • Generates a production and then worships it as if it's absolute immediately occupies hell

  • So what does that have to do with the tower of babel?

  • we know it back into 2008 when the

  • When we had that economic collapse?

  • the strange idea emerged politically and that

  • was the idea of too big to fail and

  • I thought about that idea for a long time because I thought

  • There's something deeply wrong with that is one of the things that made Marx wrong

  • was Marx believed that capital would flow into the hands of fewer and fewer people and that the

  • dissociation between the rich and the poor would become more extreme as capitalism developed and

  • Like so many things that Marx said that's it's kind of true. It's kind of true in that

  • The distribution of wealth and in fact a distribution of anything, that's produced

  • Follows a Pareto

  • Pattern and the Pareto Pattern basically is that a small proportion of people end up with the bulk of the goods

  • And it isn't just money it's it's anything that people produce creatively

  • ends up in that distribution and

  • That's actually the economists call that the Matthieu principle

  • And they take that from a statement in the new testament

  • and the statement is to those who have everything more will be given and from those who have nothing everything will be taken and

  • It's it's a map of the manner in which the world manifests itself where

  • Human creative production is involved and the map seems to indicate that as you start to produce and you're successful

  • The probability that you will continue to be successful or accelerate

  • Increases as you're successful and as you fail the probability that you will fail starts to accelerate

  • So if your progress to life looks like this or like this

  • something like that and the reason that Marx was right was because he noted that as a

  • Feature of the capitalist system the reason that he was wrong. Is that it's not a feature that's specific to a capitalist system

  • it's a feature that's general to all systems of creative production that are known and

  • so it's like a natural law and it's enough of a natural law by the way that the distribution of wealth can be modeled by

  • Physical models using the same equations that govern the distribution of gas molecules in a vacuum, so it's a really profound

  • It's a fundamentally

  • profound observation about the world way the world lays itself out, and it's problematic because if

  • resources accrue

  • unfairly to a small minority of people

  • and there's a natural law like element to that that has to be dealt with from a social perspective because if the

  • Inequality becomes too extreme then the whole system will destabilize and so you can have an intelligent

  • discussion about how to mitigate the effects of

  • the transfer of creative

  • production into the hands of a small number of people

  • Now the other reason however having said that the other reason that Marx was wrong. There's a number of them

  • One is that even though

  • creative products end

  • Up in the hands of a small number of people it's not the same people consistently across time

  • It's the same proportion of people, and that's not the same thing

  • you know like imagine that there's water going down a drain and you say well look at the

  • Spiral it's permanent, you think well the spiral is permanent, but the water Molecules aren't they're moving through it

  • And it's the same in some sense with the pareto distribution

  • is that there's a 1% and there's always a 1%, but it's not the same people it's

  • the stability of it differs from

  • culture to culture

  • but there's a lot of movement in the upper 1% a tremendous amount of movement and one of the reasons for that movement is that

  • things get large and then they get too large and then they collapse and

  • so in

  • 2008 when the politicians said too big to fail

  • They got something truly backwards as far as I can tell and that was

  • With a reverse the statement was reversed it should have been so big it had to fail

  • And that's what I think the story of the tower of babel is about it's it's a warning

  • against the

  • expansion of the system

  • Until it encompasses everything it's a warning against

  • Totalitarian presumption so what happens for example

  • When people set out to build the tower of babel as they want to build a structure that reaches to heaven

  • right so the idea is that

  • It can it can it can replace it can replace the role of God

  • it's something like that it can erase the distinction between

  • Earth and Heaven, and so there's a utopian kind of vision there as well as we can build a structure

  • That's so large and encompassing that that

  • That it can replace heaven itself

  • That's an interesting

  • The fact that that doesn't work and that God objects to it is also extraordinarily interesting and it's an indication to me of the unbelievable

  • Profundity of these stories. It's like I think one thing we should have learned from the 20th century, but of course didn't was that

  • There's something extraordinary dangerous about totalitarian utopian visions. That's something dostoevsky wrote about by the way in his great book

  • Notes from Underground because Dostoevsky figured out by the early 1900's that there was something very very

  • Pathological about a utopian vision of perfection that it was profoundly anti-human and and notes in notes from underground

  • He demolishes the notion of utopia one of the things he says that I loved it's so Brilliant said imagine that you

  • brought the Socialist utopia into being and

  • dostoyevsky says and that human beings had nothing to do except

  • eat

  • Drink and busy themselves with the continuation of the species

  • He said that the first thing that would happen under circumstances like that

  • Would be that

  • Human beings would go mad and break the system smash it just so that something unexpected

  • And crazy could happen because human beings don't want

  • utopian comfort and certainty they want adventure and Chaos and uncertainty and

  • so that the very notion of a utopia was anti-human because we're not built for

  • static utopia

  • we're built for a

  • dynamic situation where there's

  • Demands placed on us and where there's the optimal amount of uncertainty

  • Well, we know what happened in the 20th century as a consequence of the widespread

  • promulgation of utopian schemes and

  • what happened was

  • mayhem on a scale that had never been matched in the entire history of humanity, and that's really saying something because

  • There was plenty of Mayhem before the 20th century

  • I guess there wasn't as much industrial clout behind it and so so early you

  • see

  • so early in the biblical narrative you have a warning against Hubris and

  • and

  • some indication that

  • properly functioning systems have an appropriate scale I

  • read an article in the economist magazine this week about the

  • rise of Nationalist Movements all over the world as a counterbalance to

  • globalization maybe it's most marked with the European economic community

  • And the economist writers were curious about why

  • that counter movement has been developing, but it seems to me that it's also a tower of Babel phenomena is that

  • And maybe this is most evident in the European economic community

  • to bring all of that multiplicity under the

  • What would you call it under the umbrella of a single unity is?

  • To simultaneously erect a system where the top is so far from the bottom that the bottom has no connection to the top

  • You know your your your social systems have to be large enough, so they protect you, but small enough

  • So that you have a place in them, and it seems to me perhaps. That's what's happened in

  • in places like the EEC is that the distance between the typical citizen and the

  • Bureaucracy that runs the entire structure has got so great

  • that

  • it's an element of

  • destabilization in and of itself and so people revert back to say nationalistic identities because

  • It's something that they can

  • relate to

  • If there's a there's a history there and a shared identity a genuine identity

  • An identity of language and tradition it's not an artificial imposition from the top an artificial abstract imposition

  • in in the egyptian creation myth

  • the version I'm most familiar with

  • in the previous

  • Creation myth the older one the Mesopotamian creation myth

  • Mostly what you see

  • Menacing humanity is Tiamat she's the dragon of Chaos and so that's nature. It's really

  • It's really mother nature

  • red in tooth and claw

  • but by the time the egyptians come along

  • It isn't only nature that threatens humanity

  • it's the social structure itself and so the

  • egyptians had two deities that represented the social structure and one was Osiris who was

  • Like the spirit of the father. He was a great hero who established egypt, but became old and and

  • Willfully blind and and and

  • and

  • senile and he had an evil brother named Seth and

  • Seth was always conspiring to overthrow him and

  • because

  • Osiris ignored him long enough Seth did overthrow chopped him into pieces and distributed all around the kingdom and

  • His son Horus had to come back and fight

  • Osiris his son Horus had to come back and defeat

  • Seth to take the Kingdom back. That's how that story ends

  • But the egyptians seem to have realized maybe because they had become bureaucratized to quite a substantial degree

  • That it wasn't only nature that threatened

  • Humankind it was also the proclivity of human organizations to become too large too unwieldy

  • too deceitful and to willfully blind and therefore liable to collapse and

  • Again, I see echoes of that in the story of the tower of babel

  • so

  • It's a calling for

  • A

  • kind of humility of social engineering

  • one of the other things I've learned as a social scientist and

  • I've been warned about this by I would say great social scientists that

  • You want to be very careful about

  • doing large-scale

  • experimentation with large scale systems because the probability that if you implement a

  • Scheme in a large-scale social system that that scheme will have the result you intended is

  • Negligible what will happen will be something that you don't intend and even worse

  • something that works at counter purposes to your original intent and

  • so and that makes sense because

  • If you have a very very complex system

  • And you perturb it the probability that you can predict the consequence of the perturbation is extraordinary low obviously

  • If the system works though you think you understand it because it works and so you think it's simpler than it actually is and so

  • Then you think that your model of it is correct

  • and then you think that your manipulation of the model which produces

  • The outcome you model will be the outcome that's actually produced in the world that doesn't work at all

  • I Thought about that an awful lot

  • thinking about how to remediate social systems because obviously they need

  • Careful attention and adjustment, and it struck me that the proper

  • strategy for implementing social change is to stay within your domain of competence and that

  • Requires humility which is a virtue that is never

  • Promoted in Modern culture. I would say it's it's a virtue that you can hardly even talk about

  • but humility means

  • You're probably not as smart as you think you are and you should be careful and so then the question might be well

  • Ok you should be careful, but perhaps you still want to do good you want to make some positive changes?

  • how can you be careful and do good and then I would say well you try not to step out the boundaries of your

  • competence and you start small and you

  • start with things that you actually could adjust that you actually do understand that you actually could fix I

  • Mentioned to you at one point that one of the things carl jung said was that

  • Modern men don't see God because they don't look low enough. It's a very interesting Phrase and

  • one of the things that I've been

  • Promoting I suppose

  • Online is the idea that

  • You should restrict your attempts to fix things

  • to what's

  • at hand

  • So there's probably things about you that you could fix right things that you know that aren't right?

  • Not anyone else's opinion your own opinion that aren't right you can fix them

  • Maybe there's some things that you could adjust in your family that gets hard you

  • Have to have your act together a lot before you can start to adjust your family because things can kick back on you really hard

  • And you think well it's hard to put yourself together. It's really hard to put your family together

  • Why the hell do you think you can put the world together?

  • right because obviously the world is more complicated than you and your family and so if you if you're stymied in your attempts

  • Even to set your own house in order which of course you are

  • Then you would think that what that would do would be to make you very very leery about

  • announcing your broad-scale plans for social revolution

  • Well, it's a peculiar thing because that isn't how it works because people are much more likely to announce their plans for Broad-scale social revolution

  • Than they are to try to set themselves straight or to set their family straight

  • And I think the reason for that is that as soon as they try to set themselves straight or their families the system immediately

  • kicks back at them right instantly whereas if they announced their plans for large-scale social revolution

  • the lag between the

  • announcement and the kickback is so long that. They don't recognize that

  • there's any error there and so you know you can get away with being wrong if if nothing falls on you for a while, and

  • so and it's also

  • An incitement to hubris because you can now see your your plans for large-scale social revolution and stand back

  • And you don't get hit by lightning and you think well

  • I might be right even though you're not you're seriously not right. I might be right and then you think well

  • How wonderful is that especially if you could do it without any real effort, and I really do think fundamentally I believe that

  • That's what the universities teach students now. That's what they teach them to do. I really believe that and I think it's absolutely appalling

  • And I think it's horribly dangerous

  • Because it's not that easy to fix things especially if you don't

  • especially if you're not committed to it and

  • I think you know if you're committed because what you try to do is you try to straighten out your own life first

  • and that's enough like there's a I think it's a statement in the new testament that it's I think it's in the new testament that it's

  • More difficult to rule yourself than to rule the city

  • And that's not a metaphor. It's like all of you. Who've made

  • announcements to yourself about

  • Changing your diet and going to the gym every January know perfectly well how difficult it is to regulate your own

  • impulses and to bring yourself under the control of some

  • What would you say?

  • well-structured and

  • ethical

  • attentive

  • structure of values

  • it's extraordinarily difficult and so people don't do it and instead they wander off, and I think they create towers of Babel and

  • the story indicates well those things collapse under their own weight and

  • everyone goes their own Direction I

  • Think I see that happening

  • with the LGBT community I

  • think because one of the things I've noticed it's very interesting because the community is in some sense, it's not a community but

  • That's a technical error, but it's it's composed of outsiders. Let's say and

  • what you notice across the decades is that the acronym list keeps growing and

  • I think that's because there's an infinite number of ways to be an outsider and so once you open the door

  • to the construction of a group that's characterized by

  • Failing to fit into the group then you immediately create a category that's infinitely

  • expandable and so I don't know how long the acronym list is now it depends on which acronym list you consult but I've seen

  • lists of 10 or more acronyms and one of the things that's happening is that

  • The Community is starting to fragment in

  • Its in its interior because there is no unity

  • once you put a sufficient plurality under the

  • sheltering

  • structure of a single umbrella say

  • the disunity starts to appear within and I think that's also uh

  • It's a manifestation of the same issue that this particular story is dealing with

  • So that ends. I would say the most archaic stories in the in the bible

  • There's something about the flood story and and also the tower of babel

  • I think they outline the two fundamental dangers that beset Mankind one is

  • the probability that

  • Blindness and sin will produce a natural catastrophe or entice one

  • That's something modern people are very aware of in principle right because we're all hyper concerned about environmental degradation and catastrophe and so

  • That's the continual

  • Reactivation of an archetypal idea in our in our unconscious minds that there's something about the way

  • we're living that's unsustainable and that will create a

  • catastrophe it's so interesting because people believe that firmly and deeply and

  • But they don't see the relationship between that and the archetypal stories because it's the same story

  • Overconsumption greed all of that is producing an unstable state and nature will rebel and take us down

  • You hear that every day in every newspaper and every TV station?

  • It's broadcast to you constantly so that idea is presented in in Genesis in the story of Noah and then the other

  • Warning that exists in the stories one is Beware of Natural Catastrophe

  • That's produced as a consequence of blindness and greed will say the other is

  • Beware of

  • social structures that overreach

  • Because they'll also produce fragmentation and disintegration, and so it's quite remarkable. I think that that

  • With at the close of the story of the tower of babel?

  • we've got both of

  • the permanent existential dangers that

  • present themselves to humanity

  • already identified

  • At the end of the story of Adam and eve. There's like a fall into history

  • Right so in one way history begins with the fall, but there's like a second fall

  • I think with the flood and the tower of Babel and

  • history and even more real sense begins now it begins with this story of Abraham and and it's

  • it's

  • We're no longer precisely in the realm of the purely mythical. That would be another way of thinking about it

  • We have identifiable person who's part of an identifiable tribe is doing identifiable things

  • We're in the realm of history and so history begins twice in the old testament I

  • suppose it begins again after moses as well, but

  • We've moved out of the domain of the purely mythical into the realm of history with with the emergence of the stories about abraham

  • This is from aldous huxley

  • So the first thing that that I want to talk about in

  • relationship to the abrahamic stories is this idea of the experience of God because

  • Abraham although quite identifiable as an actual individual is

  • Also, characterized by this peculiarity and the peculiarity is that God manifests himself to Abraham

  • Both as a voice and but also as a presence

  • The stories never describe exactly how god manifests himself except now and then he comes in the form of an angel

  • That's fairly concrete

  • But it's a funny thing that the author of or authors of the abrahamic story

  • seems to take

  • The idea that God would make an appearance

  • more or less for granted and so

  • It's very

  • I think the part of the reason that I've struggled so much with the abrahamic stories is because it's so hard to get a handle

  • on that and to understand what that might mean and

  • So I'm going to hit it from a bunch of different perspectives and let's see if we can

  • Come up with some

  • Understanding of it the first thing I'll do is tell you a story about a female

  • Neurologist whose name escapes me at the moment. She wrote a book called my stroke of insight

  • Jill Bolte I think is her name and

  • She was a harvard-trained

  • She was she had she had

  • medical training from Harvard in Neuropsychological function and knew a lot about hemispheric specialization

  • we talked a little bit about hemispheric specialization before one of the

  • Ways of conceptualizing the difference between the two hemispheres is that the left hemisphere?

  • Operates in known territory and the right hemisphere operates in unknown territory. That's one way of thinking about or the left hemisphere operates

  • in the orderly domain and the right hemisphere operates in the chaotic domain or the left hemisphere operates in the

  • Domain of detail and the right hemisphere operates in the domain of the large picture

  • It's something like that now people differ in their neurological wiring, so those are

  • Over generalizations, but that's okay

  • we live with that for the time being it's certainly not an

  • overgeneralization to point out that you do in fact have two hemispheres and that their structures differ and if the connections between them are cut

  • Which could happen for example if you had surgery for intractable epilepsy that each hemisphere would be capable of housing its own consciousness

  • That's been well documented by a neural neural neurologist in Gazzaniga

  • Who did and Sperry who did split brain experiments must be 30 years ago now?

  • so

  • And we know that the right in the left hemisphere are specialized for different

  • Functions the right hemisphere for example seems to be more involved in the generation of negative emotion and the left hemisphere more

  • Involved in the generation of positive emotion an approach so the right hemisphere stops you and the left hemisphere moves you forward

  • anyways

  • Jill

  • Bolte I hope I've got that right

  • had a stroke

  • and

  • Maintained consciousness during the stroke and analyzed it while it was happening and she was able

  • while it was happening to

  • hypothesize about what part of her brain was being destroyed and

  • what so she had a congenital blood vessel malformation and had an aneurysm and

  • It just about killed her

  • but she said that

  • It affected her left hemisphere

  • And she said that she experienced a sense of divine unity as a consequence of the stroke

  • because the left hemisphere function was disrupted and destroyed and so she became a right hemisphere dominant and

  • her experience of that was the dissolution of the specific ego into the

  • Absolute consciousness something like that now that's only a case study, and you don't want to make too much of case studies

  • But there is an overwhelming amount of evidence

  • that those two kinds of consciousness exist

  • one being

  • your consciousness of you as a

  • localized and specified being and the other being

  • this

  • capacity to experience

  • oceanic dissolution and the sense of the cosmos being one

  • Now why we have those capacities for different conscious

  • experiences

  • Is very difficult to understand. I mean part of me thinks that

  • Maybe we have a generic human brain

  • it's the brain of the species and

  • Allied with that we have a specific

  • individual brain and one is the left hemisphere and the other is the right hemisphere the left hemisphere being the

  • specific individual brain and usually it's on and working because you obviously have to take care of yourself as a

  • specific entity and not as a generalized

  • Cosmic phenomena, it's hard to dice celery when you're a generalized cosmic phenomena

  • Right so you have to be more pointed than that but but look let's make no mistake about it

  • The fact that those different states of consciousness exists is not

  • Disputable they can be elicited in all sorts of ways and so

  • I'm going to read you something that Aldous Huxley wrote about this back, I think, in 1956 this was after he

  • Started his experimentation with mescaline

  • The psychedelics were introduced into western culture in the 1950s in a whole bunch of different ways psilocybin mushrooms

  • LsD. I was discovered right at the end of World War two

  • Was discovered by accident actually?

  • laboratory Sandoz labs the guy who discovered it Albert Hofmann had spilled some on his hands you can absorb it through your skin and

  • He was biking home and had the world's first LSD trip which was somewhat of a shock to him and then to the entire world

  • Huxley who was a great literary figure, a real genius

  • experimented with mescaline in the late fifties and

  • He wrote a book called the doors of perception which had a huge impact on the emerging psychedelic culture both on

  • The East coast at Harvard and on the West coast with Ken Kesey and his merry pranksters the people who popularized LSD

  • That's all documented in a book called the electric Kool-Aid acid test; Which I would highly recommend

  • It's Tom Wolfe it's a brilliant book on the east coast it was timothy leary

  • I had timothy leary's old job at Harvard. So that was kind of cool. You know in a warped way

  • So I met people there who knew him

  • Who didn't think much of them also, but who did know him but

  • Huxley had this mescaline experience, and it transported him to this

  • alternative consciousness

  • And he said that during his mescaline experience that the entire world glowed from within like if there was an inner light

  • like a paradisal inner light and that everything was deeply meaningful and

  • Symbolically suggestive and overwhelming and beautiful and timeless so he had an experience of divine

  • Eternity I suppose is the most straightforward way to to put that and we know perfectly well that

  • the psychedelic drugs that all share the same chemical structure they interact with the brain chemical called Serotonin

  • Which is a very very fundamental?

  • Neurotransmitter they all have approximately the same

  • range of effects

  • Although those effects are very

  • There's a very large multitude of effects that sort of exist underneath that umbrella

  • Huxley was

  • staggered by his mescaline experience he he didn't really know what to make of it, and I think that that's

  • the common experience of people who have

  • exceptionally profound psychedelic experiences and I'll

  • Tell you some documentation about that in a moment, but he spent quite a long time

  • Trying to come to grips with what this might mean from an intellectual perspective and huxley had a great brain

  • I mean someone was going to wrestle with the problem like that. He was a good candidate

  • He must have had a verbal IQ of 180. I mean he's

  • his books are incredibly literate Incredible credible mastery of language and complexity of characterization and and

  • intellectual Discourse really remarkable

  • So this is what Huxley had to say after his mescaline experience he talked about heaven and hell

  • and he talked about that in reference to bad trips essentially because

  • it was known by that point that a Psychedelic experience could transport you to an

  • Ecstatic domain of Divine revelation

  • but could take you to the worst imaginable place as well huxley was very interested in why you would even have the capacity for

  • Experiences like that and which I think is a very good question and it's completely unanswered question

  • I mean, we don't know much about consciousness and we know even less about psychedelics

  • I would say they are an absolute mystery. I don't think we understand them in the least

  • Huxley did a good job of starting to at least map out the mysteries of the terrain he said like the earth of a hundred

  • Years ago our mind still has its darkest Africa's its unmapped Borneo's and Amazonian basin in

  • Relation to the Fauna of these regions. We are not yet zoologists

  • We are mere naturalist sand collectors of specimens the fact is unfortunate

  • But we have to accept it we have to make the best of it

  • However, lowly the work of the collector must be done before we can proceed to the higher scientific tasks of classification analysis experiment and theory

  • Making like the giraffe and the duck-billed platypus the creatures inhabit these remoter regions of the mind

  • Are exceedingly improbable.

  • Nevertheless they exist they're facts of observation

  • And as such they cannot be ignored by anyone who is honestly trying to understand the world in which he lives

  • when psychiatrists started to study LSD that

  • was mostly in the late 50s and running forward from that they thought about

  • The drug as a psychedelic which was a chemical substance that would induce psychosis, but that turned out to not be true

  • not with the psychedelics because

  • schizophrenics were given LSD and

  • The schizophrenics reported that

  • while the experience experience was certainly

  • extraordinarily strange, it wasn't like being schizophrenic and

  • then it was found later that if you gave schizophrenics amphetamines that made them worse in fact you can induce a

  • Paranoid psychosis in a normal person by overdosing them with amphetamines

  • So whatever the hallucinogens are the psychedelics are doing

  • It's not the same thing as mania and it's not the same thing as schizophrenia not at all

  • so

  • So you can't just write the experience off as an induced psychosis, whatever it is

  • Independent of its utility or lack thereof it's not that

  • Now can be induced by drugs

  • Can be induced by deprivation right? I mean there are accounts throughout history of people

  • putting themselves in Extreme

  • Physiological situations in order to induce transformations of consciousness fasting is one of the routes to doing that

  • Dancing is another route

  • Isolation prolonged periods of isolation will also do it now you could say that exposing yourself to any of those in excess

  • produces a state that's

  • indistinguishable from illness and

  • That there's no reason to assume that the phenomena that are associated with illness have any

  • Utility Whatsoever although, it's interesting to me that

  • A Disrupted consciousness can Produce coherent experiences. It's not exactly what you expect

  • It was just an illness you know if you develop say a high fever

  • your experience

  • Isn't transcendent and coherent its fragmented and pathologized and and the difference

  • I think is quite distinct although

  • We don't only we don't have to only speculate about that because there's been enough experimental work done

  • Now with hallucinogens and psychedelics to indicate that

  • The notion that what they produce is something that's only akin to Pathology is wrong

  • because

  • It's not a matter of opinion at this point in the sequence of scientific and historical

  • Investigation in fact there was a large-scale study done

  • Ten Years ago? five years ago? of two hundred thousand people who had experimented with pSychedelics

  • And they were mentally and physically healthier than people who hadn't on virtually every parameter they examined in

  • fact the rate of

  • Flashbacks, you've heard of LSD flashbacks mostly a hypothetical phenomena

  • But the rate of self-reported flashbacks was higher among the non psychedelic users than among the psychedelic users

  • so that was very interesting was a huge study now it might be you could say that those who had experimented with

  • Psychedelics were prone to be healthier to begin with but he that still contradicts the Pathology argument

  • So it doesn't matter either way the Pathology argument is contradicted

  • now,

  • oh I did put that in it was Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor

  • This is what she said about her stroke I

  • Remember that first day of the stroke with terrific bittersweetness in the absence of the normal functioning of my left

  • Orientation association area my perception of my physical boundaries was no longer limited to where my skin met air. I felt like a genie

  • Liberated from its bottle it's good metaphor

  • The energy of my spirit seemed to flow like a great whale gliding through a sea of silent

  • Euphoria the absence of Physical Boundary was one of glorious bliss

  • Recently this Dr. Roland Griffith I

  • met him once at a conference in San Francisco surprised surprised a

  • Conference on awe and this was just when he was embarking on his experiments with psilocybin which were the first experiments on

  • hallucinogens that were permitted by the

  • National Institute of Mental Health in some three four decades he had to be very careful to

  • Lay out the scientific protocols so that the ethics committees would approve the experiments and so that the federal funding agencies would

  • also allow the experiments to go through he started to experiment with

  • psilocybin and

  • He's found a number of and published a number of very interesting

  • Results one was that a single psilocybin trip

  • and I

  • specified trip because

  • Sometimes when people take psilocybin out the doses that griffith uses. They don't have a psychedelic experience

  • Most people who take the dose do but not everyone those who take the dose and don't have the mystical experience don't

  • Experience the consequences of taking the drug and the consequences can be quite profound

  • So one consequence is that if you have the mystical experience that's associated with psilocybin ingestion

  • You're liable to

  • Represent that to others and yourself as one of the two or three most experienced important experiences of your entire life

  • So that would be at the same level as the birth of your child or your marriage

  • let's say assuming that those were transcendent experiences, but that's

  • But that's how people describe them so that's that's very interesting in and of itself

  • then

  • the next thing that griffith another thing that griffith reported was that one year after a

  • Psilocybin dose a single psilocybin dose profound enough to induce a mystical experience

  • the trait

  • openness of the participants had increased one standard deviation

  • Which is a tremendous amount and so it looked like one dose produced a permanent neurological and psychological transformation now

  • You know I'm not saying that that's a good thing

  • I'm not saying that because I don't think that openness is a

  • Untroubled blessing, but it's certainly a testament to the unbelievable potency of the of the drugs

  • There's about a 10% chance by the way with psilocybin ingestion of a trip to hell

  • and so that's certainly something very much worth considering when you're thinking about the potential effects of this kind of

  • experience

  • so the the mystical experience produced by psilocybin is rated by people as the most profound among the most profound experience of their life as

  • life-Changing it produces permanent personality

  • transformations eighty-five percent success in smoking cessation with a single dose

  • Right that's another thing that griffiths demonstrated now that is mind boggling because there are chemical treatments for smoking cessation

  • bupropion is one it

  • Reduces craving to some degree, but its success rate is

  • Nowhere Near 85%

  • certainly not with a single dose and

  • so

  • We don't understand how it can be that that occurs, but it's nicely documented by griffiths team in this

  • Experiment he gave psilocybin to people who are dying of cancer

  • cancer patients often develop Chronic clinically significant symptoms of depression and anxiety

  • Previous studies suggest that psilocybin may decrease depression and anxiety in cancer patients aldous huxley took LSD on his deathbed by the way

  • so the idea that there was something about

  • psychedelic substances that could

  • Buffer people against the catastrophes of mortality is an idea. That's as old as experimentation with the drug itself

  • the effects of psilocybin were studied in 51 cancer patients with life threatening diagnosis and symptoms of depression and/or anxiety

  • unsurprisingly

  • I don't really know if it's reasonable to describe the emotional state of people diagnosed with cancer of uncertain Prognosis or

  • Mortal significance as depression precisely

  • You know you know what I mean is that if you go to the doctor and he tells you that you have intractable

  • fatal cancer

  • The normative response is to be rather upset and anxious about that and so it

  • One of the things that bothers me about clinical psychiatry and clinical psychology is the automatic

  • Presupposition that even overwhelming states of negative emotion are properly categorized as depression

  • I don't think you're depressed when you get a cancer diagnosis. I don't think that's the right way to think about it

  • I think that you have a big problem

  • And it's not surprising that you're overwhelmed by negative emotion and to think about that as a psychiatric malfunction is a major error

  • but anyways

  • It's a side issue with regards to this study

  • the effects of psilocybin were studied in 51 cancer patients with life threatening diagnosis and symptoms of depression

  • And/or anxiety I cannot imagine how they got this through an ethics committee. It's just

  • We're going to take people who have uncertain diagnosis of cancer that are potentially life-threatening, and we're going to give them psychedelics. It's like

  • But they did it they did it and I think it's a testament to griffiths stature as a researcher that

  • That that was allowable

  • This is a randomized double-blind crossover trial very carefully designed clinical investigation

  • people were assigned to the treatment group or the to the drug group or the non drug group randomly blindly and

  • Investigated the effects of the drug also with different doses which is another hallmark of a well-designed

  • Pharmacological study very low Placebo like dose 1 or 3 milligrams per 70 kilograms of body weight versus a high dose

  • 22 or 30 milligrams per 70 kilograms of

  • psilocybin

  • chemical psilocybin administered in counterbalance sequence with five weeks between sessions and a six-month follow-up

  • instructions to participants and staff minimized the effects of expectancy participant staff and community observers rated

  • Participant Moods attitudes and behaviors throughout the study, that's also

  • The Hallmark of a well-designed study because they didn't rely on a single source of information for the outcome data right they got self reports

  • That's fine, but they had

  • Relatively objective observers also Gathered data at the same time

  • High-dose psilocybin produced large decreases in Clinician and self related measures of depressed mood and anxiety

  • along with increases in quality of Life life meaning and Optimism and

  • decreases in death anxiety

  • That's interesting. It's a subtle and

  • Scientifically Sparse statement, but it's a very interesting one

  • it was the in

  • there's a there's an intimation of a causal relationship here increases in quality of Life life meaning and

  • decreases in death anxiety

  • I mean the intimation there is that one of the ways of decreasing your anxiety about death is to increase the

  • felt meaning in your life and the psilocybin

  • Dosages potentiate that but it's a good thing to know in a general manner if it happens to be a generalizable truth

  • right if you're terrified of mortality

  • terrified of vulnerability

  • there's always the possibility that the life path that you're following isn't rich enough to buffer you against the

  • negative

  • element of

  • Existence. It's a reasonable hypothesis and an optimistic one

  • I think although a difficult one that six-month follow-up

  • these changes were sustained with about 80% of participants continuing to show clinically significant decreases in depressed mood and

  • anxiety

  • Steven Ross commenting about this

  • He was a co-investigator said it is simply unprecedented in

  • Psychiatry that a single dose of a medicine produces these kinds of dramatic and enduring results

  • Right which means we have no idea

  • Why this happens

  • participants attributed improvements in attitudes about life/self mood relationships and

  • spirituality to the High-dose experience with more than 80% endorsing

  • Moderately or greater increased well-being in life satisfaction

  • Community Observers showed corresponding changes

  • mystical types psilocybin experience on session day

  • Mediated the effect of psilocybin dose on therapeutic outcomes. What that means is that

  • well

  • When researchers were trying to look at a causal relationship between drug ingestion and the positive outcome

  • The causal relationship was drug ingestion mystical experience positive outcome it wasn't drug ingestion positive outcome there had to be the experience

  • Produced by the pharmaceutical agent in order for the pharmaceutical agent to have had its effect now. We don't again

  • We don't know why that is either?

  • Maybe some people needed a higher dose who knows because people vary tremendously in their sensitivity to pharmaceutical substances

  • Now why am I telling you all this well? I'm telling you for a variety of reasons one is the first is

  • Make no mistake about it

  • human beings have the capacity for forms of consciousness that are radically unlike our normative forms of consciousness and

  • the evidence that those alternative forms of consciousness are

  • purely

  • Pathological which is the simplest explanation right? You perturb the system it produces Pathology that's negative that is the simplest explanation

  • the Evidence for that is

  • weak at Best

  • Leaving out the bad trip issue which which is non-trivial

  • the empirical evidence as it accrues in fact seems to suggest that the consequence of mystical

  • positive mystical experiences associated with psychedelic intake is

  • overwhelmingly positive even in extreme situations, and you really can't find a more extreme situation than

  • uncertain Cancer diagnosis with

  • Concomitant and depression and anxiety like I mean that's not as bad as it gets

  • But it's kind of in the ballpark and so the fact that even under circumstances like that. There is the overwhelming

  • Probability that the experience would be positive because that's another thing you wouldn't expect you know

  • Even from some of the earlier earliest discussions about psychedelic use that were put forth by people

  • including Timothy Leary

  • Describing the importance of set right so that the early experimenters

  • noted that

  • if you had a psychedelic experience

  • and you were in a bad state or in a bad place that that was one of the precursors to a bad trip that the

  • negative emotion that you entered the

  • experience with could be magnified tremendously by the by the chemical substance and so that it was necessary to

  • be somewhere safe to be around people that you trust to be in a familiar environment to get all the

  • Variables that you couldn't control under control, but here is a situation where that isn't what's happening at all because people have this

  • cancer diagnosis of cancer diagnosis of unspecified outcome

  • And they still the vast majority of them had a positive experience and the positive experience experience had long lasting positive consequences

  • so

  • so the case that

  • the transcendent experience is not real

  • That's wrong

  • It's real. now, We don't know what that means because it actually challenges to some degree our concepts of what two dudes real

  • But it's certainly well within the realm of normative human experience

  • So it's part of the human capacity and you know there's been other neurological experiments too. There's

  • there's a researcher Canadian researcher if I remember correctly who invented something he called the God helmet and

  • It used Electromagnetic stimulation brain stimulation to induce mystical experiences now

  • I don't remember what part of the brain. He was shutting off or activating with that particular Gadget, but

  • And you know there's also. There's all sorts of other

  • indications of this sort of thing that have cropped up in other

  • domains of the Neurological literature for example

  • It's very common for people who are epileptic to have

  • religious experiences as

  • part of the prodrome to the actual seizure that was the case with dostoyevsky for example who had

  • Incredibly intense religious experiences that would culminate an epileptic seizure

  • and he said that they were of sufficient quality that he would give up his whole life to have had them and

  • the funny thing too is that

  • In my reading of dostoevsky at least is that I think that

  • epileptic seizures and the associated mystical experiences were part of what made him a

  • Transcendently Brilliant author

  • I don't think that he would have broken through into the domains of insight that he possessed without those strange neurological experiences

  • And it was certainly not the case that his epilepsy or the experiences that were associated with it

  • Produced what you might describe as an impairment in his cognitive functions quite the contrary at least that's how it looks to me

  • here's another

  • Here's another something worth considering

  • And I don't know how important it is but it might be really important it depends on how important

  • This is something that carl jung said so depends on how important jung is

  • now freud

  • Established the field of psychoanalysis and with it

  • investigation I would say

  • Rigorous investigation into the contents of the unconscious a modern psychologists and psychiatrists like to

  • What would you say? denigrate freud, but I think there's a reason for that

  • I think that freud's

  • Fundamental insights were so profound and so valuable that they got immediately absorbed into our culture and now they seem self-evident and so that all

  • That's left of freud is his errors

  • You know because we believed everything else. We believe all the profound things he discovered

  • We just take them for granted and so we don't believe the things that he said that weren't quite on the money

  • And that's all we credit with him with now

  • But he was certainly the first person who brought up the idea of the unconscious in a in a rigorous manner

  • And he was the first person to do a rigorous examination of dreams the interpretation of dreams is a great book

  • it's well worth reading and he was the first person to note that people were in some sense inhabited by

  • subpersonalities that had a certain degree of autonomy and and and independent life

  • Brilliant observation the cognitive psychologists haven't caught up with that at all yet

  • Jung was profoundly affected by freud jung was profoundly affected by Nietzsche and by freud those were his two main intellectual

  • Influences, I don't think one more than the other

  • He split with freud on the religious issue

  • That was what caused the disruption in their relationship

  • And I think it's an extremely interesting historical occurrence and it might be of profound significance

  • freud believed that the fundamental myths of the human being was the Oedipal myth, and the Eda pole myths

  • From a broader perspective is a failed hero story, so the Oedipal myth is the myth of a man who?

  • Develops who grows up, but then

  • accidentally

  • becomes too close to his mother sleeps with her. He doesn't know who she is and as a consequence blinds himself and there's a

  • There's a there's a warning about human development gone wrong in that story

  • and I think that freud put his finger on it extraordinarily well because

  • human beings have a very long period Of dependency and one of the things that you do see in clinical practice is that

  • many People's problems are

  • Associated with their inability to break free of their family like they're consumed by the family drama right they can't get Beyond

  • What happened to them in their family?

  • They're stuck in the past. It's and that's

  • That's equivalent symbolically speaking you might say to the idea of being too close to your mother of

  • the Boundaries being

  • Improperly specified and that happens far more often than anyone would like to think

  • As I said freud thought it was a universal

  • but Jung

  • See he had a different idea and his idea was that it wasn't the failed hero story. That was the universal human myth

  • it was the successful hero story, and that's a big difference like it's seriously a big difference because

  • the successful Hero's story is

  • Remembering sleeping beauty you may remember this in the disney movie

  • The Evil queen traps the prince in a dungeon, and she's not going to let him out till he's old right

  • And so there's this comical scene where she's down in the dungeon. He's all in chains, and she's laughing at him

  • telling him what his future is going to be like it's quite evil and

  • you know she

  • Paints this wonderful picture of him being freed in like 80 years and hobbling out of the castle on his his horse

  • That's old it can barely stand up in him with Grey hair and you know she and she recites this story of his eventual

  • Triumphant departure from the castle as a old and decrepit man and she has a great laugh about it, and it's nice

  • You know it's a real punchy story. It's really something wonderful for children. That's story and

  • he gets free of the of

  • the

  • Shackles and the things that free em are three little female fairies?

  • It's the positive aspect of the feminine that frees him from the dungeon, so it's very interesting and very accurate from a psychological perspective

  • it's the negative element of the feminine that encapsulates him in the dungeon and suppose development of the feminine would freeze him and

  • and then he has a the queen the evil queen is not very happy when he

  • Escapes, you may remember that she stands on top of her castle tower and starts to spin off Cosmic Sparks

  • I mean, she's quite the creature

  • enveloped in flame, and then she turns into a dragon and she then the prince has to fight with her in order to

  • Make contact with sleeping beauty and and awaken her from her

  • comatose existence as her unconscious existence and

  • That's a brilliant, It's a brilliant representation of a successful hero myth. He

  • He doesn't end up

  • staying in an unholy relationship with his mother let's say he escapes and

  • then conquers the worst thing that can be imagined and

  • Is Noble by that and not as a consequence, He's able to wake the slumbering feminine from its coma and

  • That's a Jungian story

  • And that's the story that he juxtaposed against freud see freud thought of religious phenomena

  • As part of an occult tide that would be they would drown rational rationality

  • that's why freud was so dominant Lee anti-religious and

  • Jung thought no

  • It's not the case you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater. There's something profound and

  • Central to the Hero myth and Jungian Clinical work

  • is essentially the awakening of the hero myth in the

  • analysand in the in the client or in the patient to

  • conceptualize yourself as that which can confront Chaos and triumph and that that's associated with an

  • ennobling of the of consciousness and the establishment of

  • proper positive relationships between male and female and

  • You know I'm a skeptical person

  • I'm a very very skeptical person and I've

  • Tried with every trick. I have to put a

  • Lever underneath Jung story and lift it up and and disrupt it and I I can't do it I

  • Think he was right and that freud was wrong. I mean I have great respect for freud

  • I think he got the program problem diagnosed very very nicely and in my clinical work I

  • See the phenomena that freud described emerged continually constantly that the best if you're interested in that

  • There's a documentary you should watch. I may have mentioned it before

  • I think it's the best documentary ever made certainly the best one

  • I've ever seen it's called crumb

  • And it's about an underground cartoonist Robert crumb who who is part of a hippie movement and although he hated hippies

  • He was part of the hippie movement in the 60s in San Francisco and started the entire underground comic

  • What? culture that manifested itself eventually in in

  • graphic novels, there's quite a

  • significant figure

  • from the perspective of popular art and a very very intelligent man and

  • Also, I would say a hero although a very bent and depraved and warped one

  • Someone very acutely aware of his own shadow and the documentary outlines his attempts to escape from his

  • absolutely dreadful mother and

  • The failure of his two brothers to do the same thing

  • one of whom

  • Ended up as a street beggar in San Francisco the other who drank furniture polish and died six months after the documentary was produced

  • It's an unbelievably shocking

  • documentary it's the only piece of

  • Film that I've ever seen that captures

  • Freudian Pathology I've never seen anything because you can't see it. Generally unless you're in a clinical

  • Situation unless you know the details of someone's lives the personal intimate details you cannot communicate it

  • but the

  • documentarist who made the film

  • Who's Robert zwigoff if I remember correctly was a friend of the crumbs and so he got access in a way that no one else?

  • Would have and they were also very forthright and forthcoming about their situation in general

  • I would highly recommend that it's it's a real punch if you want to know how a rapist thinks

  • Like if actually want to know because maybe you don't want to know in fact you probably don't want to know

  • Right because do you really want to know that?

  • Because the understand that means to put yourself in that position and to understand it if you really want to know how a serial sexual

  • Predator thinks and why if you watch crumb and you pay attention?

  • you'll know and

  • That's only a tiny bit of what the film has to offer. It's really quite remarkable

  • anyways

  • Jung split with freud on the issue of

  • Beautiful story as the fundamental myth of humankind and on the issue of the validity

  • of the religious Viewpoint and

  • Jung came down heavily on the side of the validity of the religious Viewpoint and he established that in a book called symbols of

  • Transformation which was written in 1914 and that's the book that broke that produced the break

  • permanent split with freud and that book I

  • Would say that books actually been written three times

  • it was written as symbols of four times written in symbols of transformation which jung

  • extensively revised when he was all and then it was rewritten in his innocence by a student of Jung's called

  • Erich Neumann who is also something someone I would really recommend Erich Neumann I think is Jung's greatest student and

  • He wrote two books. He wrote one called the origins and history of consciousness

  • Which is a description of the development of consciousness out of unconsciousness

  • Using the hero myth as a...

  • what would you say? as a as an interpretive Skeleton, so Neumann viewed the hero myth as

  • The dramatized story of the emergence of human consciousness out of the surrounding

  • Unconsciousness in which it was embedded the struggle for consciousness the struggle of consciousness upward towards the light like a lotus flower

  • Struggles up through the muck and and the water to to lay itself on the surface of the

  • Water and bloom and reveal the Buddha which is of course what the lotus flower does from the symbolic perspective?

  • for Neumann

  • The Hero's story was the story of the development success development of consciousness and the origins of consciousness

  • The origins and history of consciousness is a great book

  • interestingly

  • Camille Paglia wrote read

  • The origins and history of consciousness. She's one of the few

  • Mainstream intellectuals that I've ever encountered who read that and commented on it and she believed that it would be sufficient

  • antidote to postmodern denigration of literature, she thought it was that powerful of work and I

  • Believe that I I think it's a remarkable

  • Book carl jung wrote the foreword to that book and he said in the foreword that it was the book that he wished he would

  • Have written so sort of like Jung he. Wrote I don't remember how many volumes

  • dozens of very thick difficult volumes was like Neumann was able to

  • What? Distill those into a single

  • volume statement

  • And so I would also say if you're interested in Jung the best book to read is the origins and history of consciousness

  • It's the best intro into into the Jungian world seems very difficult to

  • very difficult to understand it requires a real shift of perspective in order to understand what he's talking about and

  • Neumann wrote another book called the great mother

  • Which is a little bit more specialized in some sense

  • but it's also extremely interesting because it flashes out the archetype of Chaos and

  • It's representation as feminine. It's a brilliant book as well, and

  • highly worth Highly worth reading both those books

  • anyways

  • Young was a very strange person and a visionary and and

  • So he that's kept him outside of

  • The academic realm almost entirely I mean I was constantly warned as an undergraduate, and then a graduate student and then a professor

  • against ever talking about jung in any way whatsoever

  • When I went on the job market when I was at McGill when I had graduated from McGill

  • I'd done my scientific research in alcoholism, and I had a fairly Lengthy publication record

  • That was pure empirical research and really neural

  • physiological research

  • into the pharmacology of alcoholism and I

  • established a reasonably solid

  • dossier of publications

  • but at the same time I was writing this book that became maps of meaning and sorry split my time and graduate student school between

  • these two endeavors one very

  • Specifically neurological and pharmacological and really biologically based on the other very

  • Abstract religious symbolic psychoanalytic

  • The complete opposite, but I could see that the two things

  • overlapped really nicely and there was a number of

  • Scientists at the time that were also drawing the same

  • conclusions the same

  • Relationship between the biology and the psychoanalysis jacques panksepp who wrote a book called effective neuroscience which is a great classic is

  • one of those people who who saw the

  • relationship between the Neurobiology of emotion and motivation and the psychoanalytic insights

  • Never became a mainstream view but I think it's too complex

  • I think that bridging the gap between the biology and and the symbolic is too much for people generally speaking

  • You know it was certainly virtually too much for me because I got quite ill when I was a graduate student I think

  • for a variety of reasons

  • I also like with glug party three nights a week, and so that probably had something to do with it, but

  • But working on those two things simultaneously was also rather exhausting now

  • Jung

  • Was a tremendously insightful clinician

  • And he was a strange person introverted visionary

  • High in introversion very very very very very high in openness like off-the-charts and also God only knows what his IQ was I mean

  • Every time I read you it's like reading Nietzsche

  • It's terrifying because you know he's so damn smart that he can think up

  • Answers to questions that you don't even it's not like you don't understand the answers they never conceptualized the damn questions

  • It's really something to read someone like that right who says well

  • Here's the mystery and you think wow I never thought of that as a mystery and here's the solution. It's like okay. That's that's

  • That's something you know and he could read Greek and he could read

  • He read all the ancient... He read a very large variety of ancient languages and was very familiar with the entire corpus of

  • astrological thought and of alchemical thought and of

  • classic literature and biblical stories, and I mean educated in a way that no one is educated now and

  • So he's very daunting person to encounter and terrifying absolutely terrifying his book ion

  • which is the second volume of

  • it's the second volume of Volume 9 which is the archetypes of the collective unconscious that damn book is just

  • Absolutely terrifying because jung is one of these visionaries who can see?

  • Way underneath the social structures and look at patterns that are developing across for in Jung's case across

  • Thousands of years and lays them out and so that's a really that's really something to to encounter ion is a terrifying book

  • anyways one

  • Question might be well because I read Jung and I think how the hell did he know these things how could he figure these things?

  • Out I can't understand how he could possibly know these things

  • Well, here's a partial answer

  • Jung

  • Was a visionary and so what that means as far as I can tell and like we could do a little quick survey here

  • How many of you think you think in words?

  • Put up your hands. Do you think in words?

  • Ok so it looks like what about pictures. How many of you think in pictures?

  • Ok so that's interesting how many of you think that's about half and half by the way probably a few err on the word side

  • How many of you think in pictures and words?

  • Ok and so alright, so it was Roughly 1/3 in each category

  • But that's also something that I really haven't encountered any research on

  • from the neuropsychological perspective, it's like

  • Well, do you think in pictures or do you think in words and and is that actually a reliable distinction?

  • I think I think in words

  • Most of the time, but I can think in pictures like if I'm trying to build something I can think in pictures very

  • Almost instantaneously, but it isn't my natural mode of thinking

  • I'm hyper verbal and so my natural mode of thinking is to think everything through in words

  • But I know my wife isn't like that. She thinks and images and then has to translate them into words and so

  • Anyways, you was very literate, and he could really think in words

  • but he could really think in images also talking to my wife quite extensively like her the

  • intensity of her visualization vastly exceeds mine

  • So for example if I close my eyes and then try to imagine the crowd in front of me

  • it's pretty low resolution and vague and not brilliantly colored and vivid you know it's it's it's

  • Like I'm seeing through a glass darkly. Let's say

  • I can't bring images to mind with that with spectacular clarity

  • but my wife is very good at that and you seem to be absolutely a

  • Genius at that kind of thinking and he had a lot of visionaries in his family history as well

  • So I don't know to what degree there's a hereditary component of that

  • And I don't know to what degree that's actually like a neurological specialization. I presume it would be associated with

  • the trait Openness

  • Distinguishes itself differentiates itself into interesting ideas and interest in aesthetics

  • And my suspicion are is that the people who are more interested in aesthetics are the visionary types the ones that think in images.

  • Anyways Jung could really think in images and he could imagine

  • beings and I had a client once who was a lucid dreamer and

  • How many of you had lucid dream? So you know you're dreaming? Well you well you're okay many

  • That's that phenomena wasn't really even even identified as a phenomena until the end of the 19th century

  • There was a book written about it that

  • freud tried to get his hands on but couldn't because it was a very rare book and then there was a

  • researcher about 30 years ago who started to study lucid dreams

  • But anyways, I had a client who was a lucid dreamer and one of the things she could do was

  • Ask her dream characters what

  • Information they were trying to convey and they would tell her.

  • So that was very interesting; and one of the consequences of that was I don't have this story completely right in my memory

  • But it's close enough

  • She was afraid of a very large number of things and in her dream. I think it was a gypsy

  • Standing by a wagon told her that if she was going to be successful in university

  • that she would have to visit the slaughterhouse and

  • That was something that was way beyond her capacity of tolerate she was a vegetarian

  • she couldn't stand the sight of raw meat even and so and

  • She was very oppressed and depressed and anxious because of the slaughterhouse nature of existence and so her dream

  • focused on that and

  • One of the consequences of that because the slaughterhouse was out of the question as a clinical intervention

  • I

  • Took her to an embalming

  • Right because because I asked her I asked her what what?

  • What might be equivalent to that and so she suggested that and you know exposure therapy is a hallmark of Clinical psychology?

  • right one of the things you do with people as a clinician is you find out what they're afraid of and

  • You gradually and voluntarily expose them to that and that cures them and that's associated with the hero myth, right?

  • It's exactly the same thing. It's like. There's a dragon

  • It's stopping you because there's lots of dragons most of them aren't stopping you. You can ignore them

  • You don't have to just go you know slash away it randomly

  • You're not supposed to be fighting dragons that aren't in your way, but if they are in your way

  • You can't ignore them and then you decompose them into sub dragons

  • And you have people you know take them on and as they take them on

  • They dispense with the dragon and they gain the power of the drag. It's like a video game

  • Actually a video game is like that. That's why people like the video games. Well, that's right, right?

  • There's a reason that you absorb power when you overcome things when you play a video game. It's not like that's

  • Intrinsic to the video game structure, that's an archetypal idea

  • Anyways, we went and saw an embalmbng which was a very interesting

  • experience and

  • and

  • quite quite useful for her because she knew what she could tolerate after that and it was a hell of a lot more than she

  • Thought she could tolerate and so that's very useful to know

  • Back to Jung

  • He's a visionary thinker now my client. I said she could lucid dream, and she could ask her dream

  • characters

  • What they wanted and what they were trying to communicate to her so that was pretty interesting

  • That happens spontaneously had nothing to do with me

  • I mean, I'm interested in dreams and many of my clients are great dreamers

  • Especially the creative ones because I think it's a hallmark of creativity to have vivid dreams and to be able to remember them

  • But that was a faculty that was natural to her

  • Jung

  • Had this other client at One time at one point

  • And she had a variety of fears and she had this dream that

  • She told me and she was walking down a beach

  • And on the side of the beach up a dune a small dune

  • there was this old man with a snake a big python, and there's a crowd around him and

  • she was walking by the

  • Snake handler and the snake in the crowd and she didn't want to have anything to do with them

  • he was sort of showing people the snake and

  • She told me that dream, and I thought well. You know you probably need to go see that snake

  • and so I

  • Relaxed hers quasi hypnotic technique, and it's very straightforward

  • Hypnosis is generally nothing but

  • pronounced relaxation well you have to be susceptible to hypnosis to actually fall into a hypnotic trance as a

  • Consequence of being relaxed I just relaxed her

  • I had her breathe deeply and pay attention to different parts of her body and just relax her muscles

  • One by one essentially so that she could concentrate and then I told her we play with the dream a little bit

  • It's a Jungian technique said well, so call the dream image to mind which she could do quite well said okay

  • So let's let's explore it. It's like pretend. It's like pretend play

  • You know if you're a kid in your pretend playing you don't exactly direct the game right you you play the game?

  • So it's partly your direction obviously because you're the player

  • But the thing also happens spontaneously

  • Out of its own accord and you can think about that as a dialogue between the conscious mind in the unconscious mind in some sense

  • It's a developmental dialogue. It's not a fun game. If you just direct it. It's only a fun game if

  • you're inviting and something is well as a consequence the same thing that happens when you're

  • You're engaged in some kind of artistic or literary production if it's all top down

  • You know if you're forcing it then it's Propaganda

  • It's empty what you want to sort of put yourself in a receptive state of mind in an imaginative state of mind

  • And it's sort of half you in half

  • Nature itself

  • Manifesting itself in your creative imagination, and that was the sort of state that we were striving for, and she, I

  • Asked her when she was in relaxed. I said well, what do you think about the snake handler and she said well?

  • He's probably a Charlatan and he's just their turn to impress the crowd and to show off and she was afraid to go up there

  • Because she thought people would push her towards the snake and she'd have to touch it

  • And so there was a fear of the crowd issue going on there too, and I said well, just look go up there

  • About do it under these conditions. Is that you know if people get pushy

  • What are you going to tell them and so we figured out something said look?

  • Just tell them that

  • You know you want to

  • look at the snake at your own pace and that you don't need any encouragement or help and it would be good if you

  • Were just left alone so that enabled her to defend yourself

  • so she was afraid that the crowd would push her to do something that

  • She didn't want to do that was part of the theme of the dream

  • So anyway

  • she

  • Eventually climbed the dune in her imagination

  • And went into the crowd and the crowd turned out to be quite welcoming and not hostile and not pushy

  • Which isn't what you'd expect right because the you'd think the crowd would have,

  • Reacted in accordance with her fears since it was her fantasy, but that's the thing about fantasies. They have this autonomous quality

  • But the crowd was welcoming and not hostile and it turned out that the snake handler wasn't a Charlatan

  • He was just an old guy who had this snake and he was out there

  • just showing it to people because he thought it was a cool thing and and

  • And that maybe it was good for people to come and look at a snake and so she got close enough to the snake to

  • touch it and so

  • So I'm telling you that because I want you to understand a bit more about what jung was trying to do and so

  • He wrote these books

  • notebooks that haven't been published yet called the black books and the black books are the

  • documentation of his experiments with his imagination

  • and

  • What he would do is he dream like a child daydreams. He regained that faculty although

  • I think with Jung it was a faculty that had never really disappeared and

  • he had figures of imagination that came to him that he could speak with and

  • He spoke with these figures of imagination and documented that over a very long period of time, and that was originally that was

  • eventually

  • Distilled into a book called the red book which was published about three or four years ago

  • and it was a book that jung regarded as the

  • Central source from which all his inspiration

  • emerged

  • it was sort of the way it looks to me is that

  • we embody a lot of information in our action right and our action has

  • Developed as a consequence of imitating other people and not only the people the people around us

  • But of course the people around us imitated the people who came before them and those people imitated the people who came before them

  • And so on so far back that it's as far back as you can go and so you embody these patterns of behavior that are

  • Extremely informative that you don't understand that are a consequence of collective imitation across the centuries and so then those

  • patterns can become manifest as figures of the imagination and those figures of

  • imagination are the distillation of patterns of behavior and

  • so as

  • The distillation of patterns of behavior they have content and it's not you that content. It's you could even think about it as content

  • That's evolves although

  • It's culturally transmitted this

  • content that's evolved and so these figures of the imagination can reveal the structure of reality to you and

  • That's what happened with jung, and that's what he described in the red book, and that was what permeated his

  • psychology, A

  • Psychology that was based on the presupposition

  • That the fundamental archetypal structures of religious belief were not

  • pathological not deceitful not

  • Protective in some delusional sense against the fear of death, but quite the contrary the very stories that in

  • enabled us to move forward as

  • confident human beings in the face of Chaos itself

  • And it's conceivable. I think perhaps probable

  • That nothing more important

  • Conceptually happened in the 20th century than that

  • Because it was the first time

  • post enlightenment

  • that a rapprochement between

  • the intellect and the underlying

  • religious archetypal sub structure

  • Occurred you have in the capacious intellect of young the same thing happened to some degree with Piaget

  • the religious domain and the factual domain were brought back together and

  • the fact of Jung's enduring and

  • Increasing popularity and influence, I would say is a direct consequence of that now

  • some of his work was spun off into the new age and

  • And the new age is a very optimistic and naive movement

  • It's predicated on the idea that you can do nothing say, but follow your bliss and that will take you

  • Ever higher to enlightenment, and that's not the Jungian idea at all

  • the Jungian idea is that

  • What you most need will be found where you least want to look

  • So there's this story king arthur

  • There's this story of king arthur that they're all in a round table right king arthur and his knights. They're all equals. They're all

  • superordinate, but they're all equals and they go off to look for the holy Grail and

  • The holy Grail is the container of the redemptive substance whatever that is

  • It might be the cup that christ used at the last supper might be

  • Chalice that was used to capture his blood on the cross right when he was pierced by a sword the stories differ

  • But that's the holy grail and the holy grail is lost

  • that's the redemptive substance and the knights of king arthur go off to search for the holy Grail and

  • But they don't know where to look

  • So where do you look when you don't know where to look for something you need?

  • desperately

  • But have lost

  • well each of the knights goes into the forest at the point of the Darkest to him and

  • That's Jungian psychoanalysis in a nutshell

  • It's like that which you fear and avoid that's what you hold in contempt that which disgusts you and that you avoid

  • That's the Gateway to what you need to know

  • There's nothing new age about that. That's for sure

  • Now Jung when he started this endeavor, He started with this this is part of the notebooks from the black book he said

  • He wrote my soul

  • For my soul. Where are you? Do you hear me? I speak I call you are you there?

  • I've returned I'm

  • Here again, I've Shaken the dust of all the lands from my feet, and I've come to you. I am with you

  • After long years of long wandering I have come to you again

  • for the Jungians the

  • Hero's journey is a journey within and and I think that that's probably

  • the

  • Bias of introverts to believe that the Hero's journey isn't only an inward Journey

  • I think that it can be an outward journey too because I don't think it matters where you confront the unknown whether it's within or

  • Without what matters is whether or not you confront the unknown. That's what matters

  • But he found that what he had ignored

  • Was an undiscovered part of himself so that might be something that was equivalent to huxley's

  • Notion that there were tremendous

  • Tremendous Potential breath in the realm of human Conscious experience and Huxley was influenced to some degree by Jung

  • now Jung knew of Huxley's experiments and had commented on psychedelic use and he said something like

  • Beware of wisdom you did not earn and

  • Jung was very good at stating things very profoundly very simply and that's a very intelligent piece of advice Beware of

  • Wisdom you did not earn he wrote a paper

  • If you're interested in this sort of thing he wrote a paper be called the relations between the ego and the unconscious

  • Which is an absolute masterwork, but completely incomprehensible unless you know what it unless you know what it's about

  • And what it's about is the danger of what he called ego inflation

  • And so one of the things that can happen as a consequence of a revelatory experience is

  • that the

  • Division between the individual ego and and and what would you call it?

  • So hard to come up with a word that isn't

  • somehow naive or

  • or cliched

  • To erase the relationship the boundary between the specific consciousness of the ego and the more generalized

  • consciousness

  • And more generalized consciousness as such is

  • A dangerous thing to do because you can start to equate yourself your specific self with that more generalized

  • consciousness as such and Jung thought about that is it something akin to a psychotic inflation and

  • the paper relations between the ego and the unconscious is a document that tells you how to avoid that if you're

  • playing in this kind of realm and

  • one of the

  • Injunctions is to keep your feet on the ground

  • He thought that was what partly what happened to Nietzsche was that Nietzsche wasn't grounded enough in life

  • He wasn't grounded enough in Day-To-day rituals and routines and the mundane now you could debate whether or not

  • That's the case whether or not that's a reasonable argument, but that was still what Jung believed

  • Okay, so why am I telling you all this?

  • I'll finish with this from December 1913 onward jung carried on in the same procedure

  • Deliberately evoke a fantasy in a waking state

  • And then entering into it as a drama these fantasies may be understood as a type of dramatized thinking in pictorial form in

  • Retrospect he recalled that his scientific question was to see what took place when he switched off consciousness

  • the example of dreams indicated the

  • existence of background activity

  • And he wanted to give this a possibility of emerging just as one does when taking mescaline. These journals are jung's contemporary?

  • Contemporaneous clinical ledger to his most difficult experiment or what later describes as a voyage of discovery to the other pole of the world?

  • You'll believe that we were dreaming all the time

  • but that during waking life the pressure of external images was such that the

  • Unconscious fantasy imagery was or that the fantasy imagery was of insufficient magnitude to be conscious

  • But that we were always situated in a dream in relationship to the world

  • so

  • When we started talking about

  • The creation of the universe at the beginning of the genesis stories, I spent quite a long time setting the stage for the stories because

  • There's no point in having a conversation about the God who gives rise to being

  • Unless you have some sense of what that might conceivably mean to the modern mind, and I felt the same way about

  • the Abrahamic stories is I couldn't get a handle on them

  • Until I could understand and articulate more clearly

  • What it might mean?

  • how a modern person might understand a

  • direct experience of God in the first question would be

  • is such a thing possible and the answer to that seems to be a

  • Qualified yes, first of all it's a universal human experience. That's a very strange thing

  • It's not something that people have made up as freud might have it as a defense against death. It's not a tenable hypothesis

  • it's a realm of potential experience now that experience doesn't necessarily have to have the

  • Judeo-Christian content that we've been discussing quite the contrary there are

  • Manifestations of this these alternative forms of consciousness all over the world that take on their own peculiar forms although

  • They're patterned to some degree

  • that's like the hero myth for example of myth of the fight against the dragon seems to be unbelievably widespread and

  • So it's not as if it's random

  • Sorry, I should just see what time it is here

  • But there's not much point in having a discussion about what happens to abraham

  • Unless you can conceptualize it in terms that are amenable to modern skeptical consciousness

  • So we can establish the proposition that

  • Mystical experience is not only possible It's quite common

  • and It's inducible in a variety of ways and the manner in which it's inducible is reliable and there's no evidence as well that it's pathological

  • In fact there's a fair bit of evidence that the patterns of behavior that are associated with the mystical experience are

  • core elements of proper Human adaptation in the world

  • The abrahamic stories open up with a manifest God now I'm going to read you some things from Friedman who wrote the disappearance of God

  • He was trying to look at the underlying structure of the stories now. You know Friedman noted that

  • The books in the old testament were written by a lot of different people

  • At very different times and then they were sequenced by other people for reasons that we don't exactly understand

  • But there's still an underlying narrative

  • There's multiple underlying narrative unities despite the fact of that rather arbitrary sequencing, and that's a strange thing

  • You know I guess you could say

  • If you had a collection of ancient books and you were trying to put them together you'd try to put them together in some way

  • that made sense

  • right and it wouldn't make sense unless you stumbled across some kind of underlying narrative that allowed you to order them and

  • So it's not entirely surprising that that they're ordered in a manner that's comprehensible, but

  • Friedman's comments on the Underlying narrative structure

  • part of it was

  • well, we'll go through this the books of the old testament were composed by a great many authors according to both traditional religious views in

  • Modern Critical scholarship the phenomenon of the diminishing apparent presence of God across so many stories

  • Through so many books by so many authors spread over so many centuries is

  • Consistent enough to be striking impressive and ultimately mysterious

  • But the hiding of the divine face is only half the story

  • There's another development also extending across the course of the entire narrative of the Hebrew Bible

  • which we must see before we can appreciate the full force of this phenomena and

  • before we can pose a solution to the mystery of this of how this happened gradually from

  • Genesis to Ezra and Esther there is a transition from Divine to human responsibility for life on Earth

  • the story begins in Genesis with God in complete control of the creation

  • But by the end humans have arrived at a stage at which in all apparent ways they have responsibility for the fate of the world

  • the first two human beings

  • Adam and Eve. Take little responsibility themselves they do not design or build anything when they're embarrassed over there nudity

  • They do not make clothes they cover themselves with leaves. It's God who makes their first clothing for them

  • Noah

  • By no means a fully developed personality Noah is not an everyman either broadly speaking

  • He reflects a step Beyond Adam and eve in human character and responsibility

  • Abraham

  • Beyond the counts of Divine commands that abraham does carry out the narrative also includes a variety of stories in Which abraham

  • Acts on his own initiative he divides land with his nephew lot

  • He battles kings he takes concubines he argues with his wife Sarah on two occasions

  • he tells kings that Sarah is his sister out of fear that they will kill him to get his wife and

  • He arranges in son's marriage in the place of the single story of Noah's drunkenness

  • There are in the case of Abraham the stories of man's life

  • The Abraham section thus develops the personality and character of a man a man

  • To a new degree in biblical narrative while picturing in him a new degree of responsibility it is not just that Abraham is kind lured

  • Kinder gentler More Intrepid more ethical or a better debater than his ancestor, Noah?

  • Rather both the Noah and the Abraham stories are pieces of a development of an increasingly stronger stance of humans relative to the deity

  • Before the story is over humans will become a great deal stronger and bolder than abraham

  • I don't know what that means you know

  • see

  • It isn't it is certainly the case that

  • the individual exists in the Modern world the differentiated

  • Self-Aware self conscious individual and it's certainly the case that that wasn't the case at some point in the past and

  • So it's the case that there's been a development

  • I don't know if you could call it a progression

  • But a development of the autonomous individual over some span of historical time now

  • We don't know how long that's been but my suspicions are it hasn't been that long

  • I mean,

  • I read once

  • about a neolithic ceremony that involved the particular placement of a bear skull in a cave, and then I read that and

  • They had found these placements in caves that were at least 25,000 years old

  • And then I read that they found caves in Japan among the Ainu

  • who were

  • the indigenous inhabitants of Japanese territory and Rather Archaic people who

  • Had the same ceremony with the bear and that put the skull in the same orientation

  • And place in caves and that that tradition remained unbroken for about 25,000 years

  • And you think:

  • Well is it possible for an oral or ritual tradition to remain unbroken for?

  • Spans of tens of thousands of years and the answer to that is not only is it possible. It's actually the norm

  • because like

  • One Chimpanzee is like the next chimpanzee right in the in the progression in the biological

  • Progression if you took a chimpanzee troop now, and he went back 25,000 years and you looked at a chimpanzee troop

  • It'd be the same thing. There's no historical progression

  • That's how you can tell the chimps really don't have culture

  • Because it's bigger it could even accrete one one thousandth of a percent of culture transmissible culture per generation

  • It wouldn't take more than about a million years before

  • They'd have a whole civilization

  • And they don't they're the same as they were and so the continuity the stability and unchanging nature of the species

  • Essentially speaking is the rule that the variant is us

  • It's like what the hell happened after the last ice age

  • fifteen thousand years ago

  • We went from Tribal

  • Uniform stable to whatever the hell. We are now it's this transition from

  • Generic to specific, it's something like that, and I can't help but think that that's reflective in this text

  • and it has something to do with this transition of consciousness from

  • From what from possession by the Generic divine to dominance by the specific individual?

  • It's something like that. Is that a neurological transformation?

  • is that what this is a record of being that we don't know one of the things young said about God because

  • Humans relationship with God as an object of belief is very complex

  • He in his technical writing

  • He always talks about the image of God he never talks about God he talks about the image of God

  • He said that the image of God dwells within that's not the same thing as God dwelling within right we could mean all of these

  • Capacities that we have for transcended consciousness could be a byproduct of biological evolution they could have no reflection

  • They could have no relationship whatsoever to an actual transcendent reality

  • There's no way of telling the transcendent reality seems to manifest itself as an element of experience

  • But that doesn't mean that it has in reality outside of the subjective

  • even if it's even if it exists as it is it clearly does but

  • Friedman suggests that what's happening in the biblical narrative is the sequential emergence of the individual as a redemptive?

  • Force and

  • that the old testament documents that

  • implicitly unconsciously as a consequence of

  • Descriptive fantasy and that that's what's going on in the book and that

  • so the cosmos is under the control of

  • Generic Deity to begin with something like that and then that control shifts to

  • localized identifiable

  • increasingly personal and detailed individuals

  • you see that in Noah, and then you see the neighbor ham and then you Moses and

  • Then there's this working out of what it would mean to be a fully developed individual, and that's what these stories. They're...

  • They're like prototype, they're attempts to...

  • To bring about the proper mode of being right and so Abraham is a is a manifestation about because he enters into a covenant with

  • God he's selected by God or enters into a partnership with God. It's not exactly obvious. God

  • provides him with forward motion and intuition and

  • Leads them towards a successful mode of being and it's complex successful mode of being cuz Abraham is a very complex life

  • There's plenty of ups and downs right it's it's not

  • unbroken

  • purity of being

  • Towards a divine and abraham lies and cheats and deceives and does all sorts of things that that a real person would do and

  • And moses for example kills someone and so these people that the biblical people are very

  • Genuine individuals, but they're given with all their faults right with all their sins with all their deceit

  • They're still put forth as potential modes of proper models of potential

  • proper being in the world and the entire corpus of the

  • Bible seems to be nothing but an attempt to keep throwing up variants of the

  • Personality trying to experiment to find out what personality works in the world

  • of course from a Christian perspective that culminates in the figure of christ as the redemptive word and that's

  • associated as we've already talked about with the force that brought order out of Chaos at the beginning of time and

  • so

  • well, that's my attempt to

  • provide proper context for the understanding of the abrahamic stories

  • And so hopefully with that context we can move forward

  • being able to

  • swallow the camel so to speak of the initial presence of God in the stories and

  • So we'll return to all of that next week

  • Let's wait one second. Okay till people

  • Have an opportunity to leave

  • I would very much like to ask the people who are asking the questions

  • To take a few seconds before they ask the question and make sure that the mic is positioned properly

  • So that everyone can hear you because people keep writing and complaining that while they're very happy with the questions

  • And I would say the questions have been a very high caliber so far, but they're not very happy that they can't hear them

  • So I know that you know you're obviously nervous and in a hurry when you want to ask you a question

  • but take a second or two to

  • Set the mic up properly and make sure that everyone can hear you and so

  • Have a way at it.

  • "Hello Dr. Peterson"

  • Hey, there we go

  • "Tonight, I'd like to ask you about two different psychological disorders the first being Borderline personality disorder

  • so two lectures ago

  • Somebody asks you about it, and you gave a very sparse answer

  • I can't remember exactly what you said, but it seemed like it was uh

  • It would there was too much complexity to just answer it right there and then and then somebody else also acts

  • Asked you about the same disorder in

  • your patreon livestream recently and when they when they asked you that you kind of you kind of Stopped for a moment and

  • Something I don't know something kind of flicked on in your head

  • It seemed like and you and you thought for a couple seconds

  • And then you said you know what I don't think

  • That I can answer that right now because just - it's just too bloody complex, and I was wondering just like

  • Many young men have gravitated towards your lectures. Do you think that there's something about this particular disorder that

  • There's something about people with this particular disorder that might gravitate to your insights and your lectures"

  • Okay, okay, so now I would say probably no to the second one, but I could comment more about Borderline personality disorder

  • I think I have enough mental energy to do that tonight, so

  • technically speaking

  • It's often considered the female variant of antisocial personality disorder

  • So it's it's it's it's classified

  • or it's classified in the domain of externalizing disorders acting out disorders and

  • I think what happens,

  • We don't understand Borderline personality disorder very well, and it's characterized by

  • Tremendous impulsivity

  • Radical confusion of identity

  • and then this pattern of idealization of

  • people with whom the

  • person afflicted with the disorder is

  • Associating with radical idealization of those people and then radical devaluation of them

  • and then there's another theme that sort of weaves along with it, which is

  • the proclivity of

  • people with Borderline personality disorder to presume that they will be abandoned and

  • then to act in a manner that makes such abandonment virtually certain and

  • So it's a very complicated

  • disorder, but that I

  • Think gets at the Crux of it

  • One of the things that's interesting about people with Borderline personality disorder in my experience. Is that they're often

  • quite intelligent and

  • You you see in the person with Borderline personality

  • Disorder something like the waste or the squandering of tremendous potential

  • they seem capable of

  • thinking through the Nature of their problems and

  • analyzing it and discussing it but not capable whatsoever of implementing any solutions and

  • Technically, there's no relationship between IQ and conscientiousness

  • It's very weird

  • because if you read the neuropsychological literature and you

  • Read about the functions of the prefrontal Cortex. They're usually conceptualized in intellectual terms and

  • they're associated with planning and strategizing and so forth and

  • That's what conscientiousness is is planning and strategizing and implementation?

  • But the correlation between IQ and conscientiousness is zero and so as the correlation between working memory and conscientiousness

  • zero and Zero

  • Is a very low correlation right? I mean really it's hard to find things in psychology that are correlated at zero

  • Things tend to be correlated to some degree. They tend to be interrelated

  • the Borderline seems to be able to strategize and to abstract but not to be able to implement and

  • And so this the intellect per se seems to be functional

  • But it's not embodied in action

  • It's very so it can be

  • frustrating to be associated with someone who has borderline personality disorder because

  • They can tell you what the problem is and even tell you what the solution might be but there's no implementation

  • So maybe something went wrong developmentally

  • We don't know exactly how these sorts of things come about the other thing that seems to be characteristic of Borderline people with Borderline personality

  • disorder is that they they remind me very much of people who are 2 years old and

  • in some Manner like

  • people with Borderline personality

  • Disorder can have temper tantrums in fact they often do and we know now and then you see a temper tantrum

  • And they're usually thrown by two-year-olds right most people go out of temper tantrums by the time they're about three

  • They're very rare at four it. Which is a good thing because if they're still there at four that is not a good diagnostic predictor

  • that's a actually good diagnostic predictor, but it's not the kind that you want and

  • You know it's funny the way that we respond to two-year-old temper tantrums because the two-Year-old will throw themselves on the ground

  • beat their hands and their legs on the floor and scream and yell and turn red or even blue

  • I saw a child once who was capable of holding his breath during a temper tantrum until he turned blue

  • Which was really an impressive feat you should try that right? It's really hard is you really have to work at it and

  • You see that in adult borderlines. They'll have temper tantrums, and the funny thing is when a two-year-old does it it's like

  • It's you know, it's little

  • off-putting

  • but when an adult does it it's

  • Completely bloody terrifying and it happens very frequently with borderlines, and so I would also say to some degree

  • they didn't get properly socialized between that critical period Of development between two and four and you

  • See the same thing with adult males who grow up to the anti-social

  • Because a large proportion of adult males who grow up to be antisocial are aggressive as children as two-year-Olds

  • So there's a small proportion of two-Year-olds who are quite aggressive

  • They'll kick and hit and bite and steal if you put them with other two-year-olds it's about five percent of the of the Male's

  • Smaller fraction of the females, but most of them are socialized by the time, they're four

  • but there's a small percentage who aren't and they tend to stay antisocial and they tend to turn into long term offenders and

  • then attend the devel the critical period for socialization development seems to be between two and four and it seems to be mediated by

  • pretend play and Rough-and-Tumble play and those sorts of mechanisms, and if it isn't instantiated by the age of four

  • It doesn't happen, and it doesn't look like it's addressable now there are

  • dialectic behavioural therapies that have been developed for people with borderline personality disorder, and they're purported to be successful, but

  • "Okay, thank you. If I may so the second

  • Psychological disorder I want to ask you about is psychopathy

  • So you've mentioned that

  • Psychopaths tend to switch from dominance Hierarchy to dominance Hierarchy because people get tired of their shenanigans. They have to move on to fresh people

  • and

  • Psychopaths also tend to be very low in conscientiousness, and you said that when you see some of these protesters

  • at your speeches

  • some of the men in particular,

  • your

  • Clinical intuition tells you that there's something seriously pathological about them and I was wondering if you would suspect

  • That some of these men might be

  • Psychopathic as..." well some of them likely are but I don't know if a higher proportion of the ones who show up at

  • Protests and sort of creep me out

  • Or I don't know if there's a higher proportion of people like that at the protests or not

  • I mean

  • I suspect in general that regardless of the protest the proportion of people who have personality disorders among

  • Protesters is higher than the proportion of people who have personality disorders in the general

  • Population because you just expect that you just expect that kind of acting out behavior. I'm not believe me

  • I'm not saying that all protest is associated with personality disorder. I'm not saying that at all

  • There's plenty of reason for protest

  • But some of the reason for protests are

  • Credible reasons and some of them aren't credible reasons that -- "I was just thinking that like the social justice

  • Hierarchy so to speak would be one of the last that these

  • Confusing--", that's that's that's a different issue. You know there are

  • There are analysis of the dangers of agreeableness, so agreeable

  • This is a personality trait that underlies the radical

  • Egalitarian ethos because agreeable people want everything to be shared equally and it's a good

  • I think it's a good ethos for a small group for a family because family is kind of a communist system in some sense

  • Right it's like you want the food to be divided up equally among the children

  • clearly and you want all the children sort of regardless of their

  • Inherent abilities to have the same opportunities and perhaps even the same outcomes

  • So I think agreeableness which is associated at least in part with maternal

  • Maternal the Maternal Instinct let's say maternal patterns of Behavior. I think it's

  • It's a good

  • first Pass

  • Motivational approximation to a localized familial ethic I think it's a catastrophe at larger scales

  • I don't think it scales at all. I actually think that's why we evolved conscientiousness

  • Because conscientiousness is the principle that allows larger scale organizations to exist agreeableness won't do it

  • now

  • Conscientiousness is a mystery right we don't have a neurological model

  • We don't have a conceptual model

  • We don't have an animal model. We don't have a pharmacological model, and we really only have one way of assessing it which is

  • self and other reports of personality proclivity

  • so

  • anyways

  • The problem with agreeableness. This has been modeled a game theorist is that a

  • Population of cooperative people can be dominated by a single shark

  • So agreeable this is insufficient as a principle because it opens itself up to

  • you call that manipulation and

  • "infiltration?"

  • "I thought that was part of.. [unintelligible]"

  • Manipulation let's let's leave it at that to manipulation and and and and exploitation. That's the other thing

  • exploitation

  • so

  • "Thank you"

  • "Hi, Dr. Peterson. I had one quick comment and a question so my comment was about your idea of but

  • Subpersonalities as one-eyed monsters now. There's the idea of multiple personality or split personality disorder

  • It's controversial as to whether or not it exists

  • But there's some research recent research that suggests that you may actually have multiple personalities

  • That use different parts of the brain so they have differential access to the hippocampus. They have their own memories

  • They can

  • they use the brain differently, but that seems to be an exaggeration of sub personalities

  • Which is quite interesting.

  • The question I had was about

  • So you talked about Jung and how

  • You should confront that which you don't want to confront the most

  • so you're most afraid or disgusted by that you've the most resistance to arm, so but we were talking about psychedelics and

  • in the experience of hell, so

  • at least some of the people I've talked to they describe negative trips as

  • an experience of a

  • constant fear prolonged fear and

  • some of the most

  • Dramatic and personalized fear that they've ever experienced; so shouldn't negative on

  • psychedelic trips

  • Elicit the kind of concentration that Jung thought you should engage them?" Could be.

  • Could could well be you know it

  • It's conceivable that...

  • I read this strange book once that

  • made the claim that what was in the ark of the covenant was a mixture that was made from

  • Amanita Muscaria mushrooms

  • And that's not as far-fetched as you might think

  • Because there's a mycologist an amateur mycologist named Gordon Wasson

  • who

  • Established, credibly, the notion that it was Amanita Muscaria

  • potions that was the soma of the Rig veda and

  • so it's a strange idea but

  • it's not an idea that's completely outside of the realm of possibility and

  • the Amanita

  • Muscaria is the fly agaric in the red mushroom with white dots, and it's used in shamanic rituals in Cross Asia

  • and

  • It's apparently not toxic in its dried form although that is not a recommendation

  • You know this is serious serious and dangerous

  • speculation and material

  • One of the things that the priests had to do

  • before they commune with what was ever in the ark of the covenant was purify themselves and

  • So one possibility is that?

  • the bad

  • psychedelic experience is a

  • Involuntary

  • Confrontation with what you would describe as the shadow

  • It's like so

  • Beware of

  • experimenting with

  • substances that produce divine revelations if you're in a serious state of disorder

  • And I do think that is what happens to people is that they encounter?

  • Everything about them that's chaotic and out of place.

  • And some people get trapped in that and they can't get beyond it and that's because there's so much of it

  • and so

  • But we don't know enough to know

  • so

  • "Citizen Peterson, you son of a bitch

  • How are you?" I'm not too bad you got a question?

  • "That's the question. No I've got a real question. I got a great question you're going to like this one, okay?

  • It's about inspiration because you talk about inspiration quite a bit in this lecture series and also I wanted to point out

  • you have a I guess a

  • 45-minute Armchair discussion, which you have a video of one paragraph of Nietzsche's Beyond good and evil

  • You posted and it seems like you're awestruck at the structure and the choices and I guess

  • the ideas contained in various layers of this paragraph

  • And you're inspired and that inspires you to I guess do your work that you do..?

  • I encountered, I guess a similar

  • Phenomenon here with one sentence written by the great Joseph Cardinal ratzinger and

  • I mean this one sentence answers the question why do people search for God and if you could read it out and then

  • Deconstruct it. It's on sentence

  • I've copied the original pages

  • It's at the end of page 105 if you want to read it from the book or I just--" that's 'the question that

  • human existence not only poses

  • but itself is the in conclusiveness inherent in it the bounds it comes up against and that yet yearn for the

  • Unbounded more or less in the sense of Nietzsche's assertion that all pleasures yearns for eternity

  • It experiences itself as a moment

  • This simultaneity of being limited and of yearning for the unbounded and open has always prevented man from resting in himself

  • Made him sense that he is not

  • Self-sufficient, but only comes to himself by going outside himself and moving toward the entirely other and infinitely greater'

  • Well, it's a hell of a sentence

  • "Like when I read that sentence. I decided I wanted to write like Joseph Cardinal ratzinger

  • I had a very similar experience when I watched the Joe Rogan podcast

  • 877 I said I want to speak like Jordan Peterson

  • That's what I wanted to do" so I had this...

  • I had this discussion with a patreon supporter this week a young guy

  • from Australia and

  • He said something very interesting that's related to this and it's a bit. It's something that's very profound. I said I think

  • There's this idea in Christianity that we've discussed briefly that the judge and the redeemer are the same figure now

  • You know in the book of revelation you may know this and you may not

  • Christ comes back as a

  • Judge he has a sword coming out.. it's a revelatory vision. Not that that book it's a very strange

  • It's the last thing you'd expect conservative Christians to believe and believe me and such a visionary

  • hallucination the book of revelation

  • but christ comes back with a sword coming out of his mouth and he comes back as a judge and he

  • Divides the damned from the redeemed and most are damned and some are redeemed

  • It's very very harsh Jung believed that the figure of christ in the gospels was too agreeable

  • To merciful to tilted towards mercy and that that called out for a counter

  • position and that the counter position of judgment very interesting hypothesis

  • But then but then there's this this melding of the two ideas that the judge and the redeemer are the same thing

  • Okay

  • now

  • This young man told me that his life lacked

  • Purpose and direction and meaning and that he was nihilistic until he started he read "zen in the art of motorcycle maintenance"

  • Which is a book I actually like quite a bit

  • I've read it three times at different decades of my life and one of the things that's very interesting about that book is that it's

  • an examination of the idea of quality of the idea that there are

  • Qualitative distinctions between things and that we have an instinct to make qualitative distinctions and so a qualitative distinction is

  • Simply this is better than that which is a judgment

  • Okay, now what ratzinger is

  • hypothesizing is that

  • The person in enough you know how you the idea of the modern idea is you're supposed to accept yourself

  • I think that's an insane idea by the way really I think I can't think of a more nihilistic idea than that you're already ok

  • It's like no

  • You're not and the reason you're not is could you could be way more?

  • Than you are so what do you want to be you want to be ok as you are or do you want to strive

  • towards what's better? and

  • This young man this australian

  • he said that the reason that 'zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance' had such a

  • Impact on him was because he wasn't happy with his current mode of being right he didn't

  • Consider the Manner in which he conducted himself

  • sufficient and the fact that

  • The author of Zen and, it was Persik laid out the notion that you could make qualitative distinctions,

  • And there really was a difference between good things and bad things or great things and evil things, it gives you direction

  • it gives you gives you the possibility of moving upward and

  • Ratzinger is pointing out at least to some degree that

  • Human beings are insufficient in and of themselves and need the movement upward and so they need to

  • conceptualize something like the highest good and then to strive for that and

  • The thing is is that there isn't any difference

  • between conceptualizing the good and being judged

  • because if you're going to

  • conceptualize the good and move towards it what you have to do is separate from yourself all those things that aren't good and

  • leave them behind and that's where the redeemer and the judge are the same thing and

  • One of the things that's really appalling

  • I think about our modern world is that we're rejecting the notion of qualitative distinctions

  • You say well, we don't want to hurt anybody's feelings by saying that one thing is better than another it's like okay fair enough

  • It's not fun to be cast off with the damned. That's for sure

  • But if people are in fact insufficient in their present condition

  • Which seems to be the case; I mean try finding someone who isn't?

  • Then if you deny the possibility of qualitative distinction because you want to promote a radical

  • egalitarianism then you remove the possibility of redemption because there's no movement towards the good and it seems to me that it's a

  • Catastrophe to sacrifice the good for

  • Well, it's a catastrophe to sacrifice the good for the equal; because for us to be equal would be mean as far as I can

  • tell that we would all be equally unredeemed and miserable and

  • so

  • "He also mentioned in the previous paragraph

  • I believe that even in the case when you experience the human life at its fullest that it's most

  • Beautiful as its most meaningful you have a deep I guess

  • Understanding that you have something to be thankful for you need to thank somebody for that

  • It's not based entirely on your own merit and that

  • Points you towards something else and also, and-" I don't think that you can have a profoundly positive

  • experience

  • You know in the best sense without that accompanying it

  • That's a feeling of being blessed. It's something like that. Yeah. That's a good oh

  • Wait hold it. I'm going to stop you

  • Okay, because I'm going to ask this person, but I would like to say that those were remarkably good questions

  • so

  • "Dr. Peterson, thank you for the wonderful lecture

  • given your working definition of truth and

  • And let's say within the abrahamic religious tradition would you say that the more perhaps

  • mystical sects and denominations

  • which place more emphasis on the

  • transcendental experience of God also on this experience

  • as opposed to the more fundamentalist, Orthodox

  • literalist which perhaps

  • Emphasize that what I've noticed

  • Moral policing of behaviors" yeah? "would you say that the former is more true than the latter?" no. "and--"

  • no. and and okay, sorry continue. "And B: could the former in some ways serve as an antidote to

  • extremists literalism, Jihadism

  • Fundamentalism?" okay, so yes to the second part, but the first part it's a great question

  • We did some research on this a while back because we're looking at

  • the different religious proclivities of liberals and conservatives and

  • Liberals like if you're liberal it means you're high in openness and low in conscientiousness, and if you're conservative

  • Then you're high and conscientiousness and low and openness and that the liberals are spiritual and the conservatives are dogmatic

  • but it's best to think of those as

  • partners, right? because the

  • spiritual mystical end is where the revelations Emerge and the renewal, but that's where there's Chaos and and

  • Discord as well, because what's new disrupts what's stable

  • and so

  • What's new has to be turned into...

  • It has to be integrated into what's stable

  • And so you need both those poles and of course if the dogmatists get the upper-hand then everything

  • turns into a Tyranny of stone that that's egypt in the old testament, but if the if the if the

  • Mystics get the upper hand then everything floats off the earth into some

  • impractical ether that is equally counterproductive, and so there has to be a

  • dialogue between those different poles

  • And I think you see that in the distribution of human temperament

  • You know the conscientious types there they tend to be orderly the orderly types tend to tend towards kind of a right-wing

  • Totalitarianism that's their proclivity when they when they when things get out of hand especially if they're low in openness, that's a danger

  • but

  • You see the same thing with the people who are too open and not conscientious at all

  • They're dreaming all the time, but they never do anything. There's never anything implemented and that that's bad. That's a bad thing

  • So I don't think that you can say that like- the dogmatic structure is necessary because that perpetuates the system and the revelatory

  • Element is necessary because that renews it when renewal is necessary and there has to be a continual dialogue between those elements

  • So that neither of them fall prey to their own particular form of Pathology that's one of the problems with the current political

  • What would you call it?

  • Polarization that's occurring across the west is that the right and the left and are talking to each other anymore.

  • That's a very bad thing because the left will

  • wander into a pit and fail without

  • boundaries and the right will enclose itself in smaller and smaller spaces until it can't move without the left and

  • One of the reasons that democracy works is because it makes people talk; or allows them to talk you can have it either way

  • but it's in its bits because

  • Every virtue has its vice

  • right and so a meta virtue is something like the amalgamation of singular virtues into something that's a

  • Transcendent structure that has more to do with the harmony of virtues rather than with any given virtue

  • even though I think that freedom of speech is the clearest manifestation of that harmony of virtues, so and

  • "So all could be a lubricant for the beginning of this discussion. Do you think between the liberals and conservatives?"

  • I don't know how to answer that

  • It doesn't follow immediately from your from your initial presupposition, so the awe experience is a different issue

  • "[Unintelligible]"

  • Yeah, we'll be able

  • Yes, "at least exposing conservatives to some form of that experience could it be if we requisite for a more productive dialogue?"

  • See I mean in it in in in the church in church ceremony let's say a classical church ceremony

  • There's some intermingling of both right you mean you think about a church ceremony that takes place in the Gothic cathedral

  • We've certainly got the dogma and they're under and the relatively rigid rule structure

  • but at the same time that's aligned with intense beauty and

  • In the architectural forms in the in the light that's streaming in through the stained-glass

  • windows and the music and I mean the Gothic cathedrals are forests right it's a stone forest with sunlight streaming in through the Trees and

  • It's a balance between structure light there are absolutely

  • unbelievable structures

  • And they speak of the transcendent but but inside that there's a structure and so it

  • Seems that in order for the religious impulse to be balanced properly there has to be a reasonable

  • dialogue even in practice between the mystical awe-inspiring transcendent and the dogmatic yeah either of those can

  • Can go as either those goes astray without the other if you're too dogmatic. Do you need aw?

  • likely yes, because that would show you that there's something beyond your own presuppositions, so

  • So awe, I should tell you something interesting about awe as a as a physiological phenomena

  • You know how you're listening to music and you get chills?

  • Some people experience that more than others open people experience that more or music is a pretty

  • reliable

  • elicitor of

  • Chills, that's piloerection. That's your hair standing on end. You see a cat when it sees a dog puffs up. That's awe

  • It's the same thing like that that chill is your hair standing on end

  • And that's this that's sensation you get in the presence of a meta predator

  • It's something like that and so the awe

  • experience is a

  • I mean obviously it's become very cognitively and emotionally complex in human beings, but it's fundamental

  • evolutionary underpinning is

  • the Instantaneous

  • piloerection that you see in prey animals when they're confronted by a predator and of course that would be if you are a rabbit

  • You can bloody well believe that you see a wolf and it would inspire. Awe that's for sure

  • I mean if a wolf that was 20 feet high came bounding in here, man, you'd feel awe so

  • Yeah, that will convince you that there's something that you still need to know

  • last

  • last question

  • "Perfect timing. Hi, Dr. Peterson

  • My name is Gary, and I'm a clinical and counseling master student right now and so one of the key ideas

  • That's been surfacing time and time again in your

  • Lectures is the idea that

  • Phenomenology is structured and flows

  • mythologically and

  • the way that plays out is I'm

  • supposing effectively just pay attention to what comes up kind of

  • naturally and you can locate the chaotic elements in your experience and

  • Prod at them with whatever degree of Necessity you think so

  • trying to situate this within the clinical

  • context

  • We can conceptualize

  • Psychotherapy as a kind of guided journey just as you touched on in this lecture

  • Where it's more of a meta journey in a sense a meta heroic journey if I don't know how you want to think about it

  • but

  • Just for those of us who are interested in kind of grounding and implementing these ideas within?

  • psychotherapeutic practice

  • What should we watch out for in the process itself?

  • What comes up? What should we be afraid of or fearful of or cautious about or what should we tend towards that's my question"

  • Well, I think one of it

  • One of the people who I've read that's had the biggest

  • Impact on me as a Clinician was carl Rogers

  • And the reason for that is that carl Rogers put tremendous emphasis on listening.

  • Like it's almost impossible to overestimate how useful it is to listen to your clients like you need a meta

  • Scheme in some sense and

  • The meta Scheme, I think is laid out in the sermon on the mount. It's something like

  • orient yourself and your client

  • Towards the good

  • The client has to conceptualize what that might be you can serve as a guide

  • But it has to come from that person because one of the things that you want to find out from your client is okay

  • What's wrong?

  • they have to tell you and

  • What would not having something wrong look like like what is it if you could have what you wanted and that and that...

  • That would be good. What would that look like okay? So that establishes your star, right? It's like Geppetto

  • Establishing the relationship with the star at the beginning of pinocchio. Here's what we're aiming at

  • Okay, so now you've got that schema

  • Here's what we're aiming at

  • now you might say you might think well now that what happens to the client is they meet their dragons along the way and

  • The dragons would be well now

  • You know what you want,

  • And there are things in your way and some of those things might many of those things are going to be intensely practical

  • But they're practical/

  • Psychological so like so maybe someone is has a job and they would like to move forward in the job

  • But they're terrified of speaking in public

  • Well, you know is that a psychological problem or a practical problem?

  • It's both

  • It's also a real problem in many positions unless you can speak fluently

  • Publicly you're you're going to hit a ceiling and you're not going to go anywhere and so

  • For the person to move towards that goal

  • Then they have to confront the obstacles that manifest themselves

  • Within that framework and part of your job as a clinician is to identify the obstacles

  • And to discriminate them from things they don't have to worry about right part of it is

  • you know you can't just run around and try to

  • Combat all the Chaos in the world some of it is your Chaos and a bunch of it isn't and the Chaos

  • That's yours is the Chaos that emerges as you move towards a necessary goal

  • And so partly what you're doing by listening to your client is to help them cut their dragons down to size

  • You know because what will happen if you start to talk to somebody about public speaking and you really talk to them

  • Is that you decompose the problem into a set of maybe 20 subproblems like well

  • Do you know exactly how to give a speech? What's your theory of

  • Public speaking? Do you know how to look at people when you're talking? Do you know how to speak loudly enough?

  • so that people can hear you? do you have a philosophy of

  • Public speaking? you know all those things are necessary in order to do it properly you need to decompose that with the client and then to

  • Make those problems you have to decompose them to the point where they can be met by a practical solution

  • and then you have to guide the person through the implementation of the practical solution and

  • Mostly you do that by by listening

  • It's like the what you need to be is the person who helps the person

  • That you're working with orient themselves towards a better future

  • That's the compact you and I are in this space at this time to make things better

  • first of all we have to decide what better would look like and

  • Second we need a strategy and third

  • we need to

  • Once we have that we're going to see the obstacles and some of those are going to be

  • Psychological and some of them are going to be practical and we're going to engage in joint

  • problem-solving of whatever, sort is necessary in order to

  • Minimize the impact of those problems or to gain from the problems and dream analysis can be extremely useful for that by the way

  • It's even more useful for helping the person identify what the goal is because that's often difficult for people. It's like well

  • I know that something's wrong

  • But I don't know what I want. sometimes people get so stuck there that they just can't get they just can't get out of it

  • So and then what would you watch out for?

  • "Phenomenologically. The way it shows up, The way, It's experienced"

  • Well, I would say the clinician one of the things that you should watch out for is resentment

  • So there's a there's a couple of rules of thumb that I think are useful

  • Don't do anything for your clients that they can do for themselves and don't do them any favors?

  • Now I think you can step

  • Beyond the confines of your role

  • carefully now and then

  • to show that

  • There's there's there's a more human connection than the merely contractual. I think that's very useful but

  • Their problems are not your problems you do not have any right to their problems

  • And so you have to maintain that detachment because otherwise you can steal their destiny

  • You don't want to be the person that solves their problems because you steal their destiny when you do that

  • You want to be someone with whom they can figure things out for themselves?

  • And so there can be hubris in being a clinician because you can be the problem solver and that elevates you to a position

  • You elevate yourself to that position. You'll fall flat on your face

  • You'll hurt your clients and things will kick back on you very very hard because what the hell. Do you know?

  • right

  • Nothing because that person is very complicated and they need to they need to sort themselves out and but you can be a facilitator

  • For that, but that's all you should be

  • And so you have to watch that you have to watch over

  • becoming over and k over ly entangled so you have to maintain your detachment in the best sense, and you have to not overstep your

  • It's easy to become hubristic when the person is looking to you for the answers

  • It's like you might you don't have the answers although you might be able to find help the person find their way

  • That's what you do with everyone. You love - right?

  • I mean, you don't provide them with the answers because then they become little clones of you and

  • unhappy bitter resentful and Angry little clones of you because you usurped their destiny and

  • so

  • the same thing applies within familiar Arrangements or friendships all about it, so

oh

字幕與單字

單字即點即查 點擊單字可以查詢單字解釋

B1 中級

聖經》系列之八:神的現象學。 (Biblical Series VIII: The Phenomenology of the Divine)

  • 3 0
    林宜悉 發佈於 2021 年 01 月 14 日
影片單字