kzbin.info/www/bejne/eYaWl4yoisaNsM0si=eEt1qas0D108Nzg1 I do think "ancient gods seen as force relations" is intriguing but I think that's settling for high school level truisms during a time when misuse of technology (and sometimes the technology itself if it's captured enough space to do so) is swiftly diminishing us and our capabilities for the kind of resistance Foucault seems to be referring to. Noam Chomsky has said some things in a fairly recent interview, regarding Jung's work on archetypes, and I think it's more profound.

You lost me when you started glazing Jordan Peterson.

what's really going to boil your noodle later on is... do you even know why it has to be put on reddit to get feedback? rather...just asking a random person? say, at the mall? the gas station? the post office? in line at the grocery store???....👁

I just can’t buy into to the notion that without god the universe becomes meaningless. I get that our struggle to find meaning is the question but projecting that the universe actively doesn’t care is odd. What do y’all think?

Damn he’s racist against Americans lol NOICE!

A man of his times? Ironically, Black people ALWAYS knew you weren’t superior to us. Even during Jung’s time

Another good video, especially helpful when one considers how many people have heard of Jung from a certain professor whose name shall remain nameless but whose initials are JP. The trick is to hold Jung accountable but confiscate him from the kinds of guys who Marie Louise Von Franz says have always been there.

That picture with them both specifically squatting goes insanely hard. Sartres confidence and camus playing with the dog lol.

Fabulous video.

Thanks man, great video!

I think it is important to still take note of the weak hedonistic position. Where you seeking pleasure is a form of avoiding negative feelings. Something no better than the spiritual person that avoids life people can use excess pleasure to avoid life.

I love this exercise because in one instance it reminds me how insignificant I am and how small I am and how inconsequential I am in the grand scheme of things, but at the same time, I also understand and can see that without me, taking it in through my own senses through my experiences it’s all meaningless and doesn’t mean a thing.

I work with these people O.M.G help😢

Actually I was looking for human collective consciousness rather than collective unconsciousness. I recently watched a video of humans working for a common goal and ants working for a common goal and the ants were more efficient than the humans at achieving a collective chore. I was searching for human collective goal of health well being and longevity and if their is any collective goal other than for the most part most people's goal is to gain more money, which is often destructive to our long term survival as a species. Maybe there is a religious collective consciousness but it really does not present us with any goal for our future development as a collective species.

I had a Jungian therapist a couple of years ago. He mentioned that we should be careful of accepting Jungs views wholesale because of his racism. I didn’t understand why that was a helpful thing to say considering the time in which Jung lived. We didn’t understand one another as we do now. I don’t see the merit in digging through all the ways in which Jung might’ve made generalisations about the brains that lived in more ‘primitive’ cultures. He observed cultures which, even today, could be deemed as more primitive in their views or societal structure than liberal western society and made inferences about the way those people were able to think. Why is that racist if you didn’t know what we know now? The differences between these cultures were far more pronounced back then. We didn’t live in a multi cultural society as we do now. Why would someone from the 1920s assume that the differences in culture were entirely social and not also correspond to some baked in biological differences if you didn’t know any better. Honestly I do think the concept of ‘racism’ holds such cultural weight at the moment that it makes people unhelpfully fearful and dismissive of ideas, people, wisdom of the past. That’s a topic worth a video in my opinion. Does it make you fearful when you talk highly about Jung to your friends in 2025 that one of them will ask you why one of your intellectual hero’s was a racist? Cue a knowing look that says: ‘maybe you’re a racist too?’ Or perhaps doing a video like this makes you feel more comfortable that you are holding your hero’s to account, that you have a healthy separation from the influence of your intellectual father figures

That’s a Dylan painting in your background right? Could be mistaken

I am not sure if Nietzsche was a nihilist. In fact I think he was quite critical of it.

The most probable answer isn't that this is a flaw, rather that one family tree describes Joseph's line and one Mary's. Just as Joseph was an adoptive father but is still listed in Jesus' lineage, Joseph was adopted by Mary's father, a Levirite custom, so he would be listed in her family tree if she had no brothers. Joseph described as Jesus' father isn't a contradiction, even if he's the son of God. Although he's a descendent of Mary, Joseph could be described as the son in her family tree. The Messiah is prophesied to be a direct descendent of David and that's where Mary comes in, and Luke--the Gospel which prioritizes Jesus' humanity--likely details her family tree while Matthew describes his adoptive one, even if Joseph isn't the biological father in either line.

Even if you doubt it's perfection, the Bible has proven itself to be our largest and most valuable historical account of the ancient world, available to modern man. People revere Herodus as a historian when most of his stories are myth but toss away multiple sources from different authors which show how man wrote poetry, history, biography, prophecy, family trees, and even letters in the ancient world. To claim that the Bible isn't History because you spot flaws in it is to claim that any Historical source isn't history because you can spot an imperfection.

Any resources on the evolution of our diet, spanning the period covered here, and perhaps also including the history of cooking and fire? I'd buy the book in an instant! Pluspoints for big colour prints :)

What do you all have with those "reasons" and "meanings"? What do you actually mean by that?! You, philosophers, are funny! :D :D Just because you can construct the question grammatically like "What is the meaning of life", it doesn't have to have any meaning. You only love the process of thinking out of the box, so you desperately try to find a problem, even though there is none. You only pose meaningless questions and then you try to answer them. If you ask about life, modern evolutionary biology provides the true answers to all the questions you can ever pose! Compared to evolutionary biology, philosophy is just ... cute..adorable. Darwin would eat Nietzsche and excrete Camus and Sartre. :D

Camus’ life is also a life not worth living. How does “integrity” even enter the picture in his view. That value flows from nowhere and supposes a meaning to life. He, like pretty much all philosophers, are just deluding themselves and projecting intellectual sounding vomit upon the masses.

I was once at a meeting of The Atanta Jungian Society and we had to introduce ourselves and I began with Thank goodness I am Ric Chambers and not a Jungian, and I think Jung would be proud. This was a rift off of Jung's statement you used to end this video. We might also use, "I come to bury Ceaser not to praise him;" or "If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him." Having read Jung's collective works though the 1980s and knowing the current times I knew this video had to be made. I have not just followed your channel for over a year; I have subscribed and I am attempting to watch every video. I treat your channel like a curriculum and would really like to integrate your channel; among others, as curriculum for people on an individual journey toward health, happiness, and harmony. As usual you not only hits the right emotional tone; there is a sense of grief and disappointment and loss not unlike what is happening in most families as the younger generation sees the unconscious bias, systematic racism and sexism, etc. in their parents and battles whether to cancel or go no contact on the one hand but at the same time realizes the love and benefits and sacrifice of the parents. Several times you said the point is not to cancel Jung and it was implied but not stated that neither is the point to defend him. For me; you are opening a door that leads to a wonderland of thought and growth (which is why I love your channel). You and I are current pioneers; the pioneering of mental terrain is ongoing. You are pioneering the narrow road, the eye of the needle, between the opportunities for one side of the fence to realize how they are racists even if they consciously detest racism and for the other side to find the way between canceling and defending.

Halfway through. But what I hear is it’s clear that you speak from a literal and materialist lens, and Jung was trying to speak from an abstract, spiritual lens. Mankind as a concept. And races as convenient markers in physical reality. If you study Spiral Dynamics, you may see the same ideas explained in language that refers less to direct examples of people. When all you have are single examples (Jung's examples were only from trips to places), I feel you have no choice but to use those single examples. We benefit in our times from much more information, allowing us to use abstract terms like the Spiral Dynamics stages. Something I feel he was not afforded. I will finish the video and finish my comment. Edit: Finished it. I would suggest that anyone interested look into Spiral Dynamics. It speaks to a different lens of the cultural memes that mankind has been observed to move through and the cultural memes can be like languages shared among the cultures, which makes it difficult to differentiate too far from. You simply grow up speaking the language you speak. (I speak English because I grew up around English speakers.) If I were to translate Jung’s observations in this video to stages, I hear him noting that the African communities displayed Purple (clan-oriented and mystical) and Red (power and dominance) worldviews. Europe was Blue (peace and order), while America was Orange (individualism and merit) at the time, which made Americans more talkative. The American black community could be noted as Red (power and dominance) at the time, which echoes Orange a bit, but is more survival-oriented (violence is more acceptable). You read to me as Green (relative, postmodern, egalitarian), which reflects your background in Europe. As you note with Jung, these observations are not a dominance hierarchy or a grounds for superiority. They are merely an observation of what stage a culture is in. Europe went through all earlier stages as any culture did. It is like observing a baby cry and saying, “I remember crying as a baby.” Or watching a teenager rebel and saying, “Ah yes. The teen years.” That is not a value judgment. That is an observation. (It should be noted that someone who views stages as "better" and "worse" and trying to moralize it are likely pre-Green. And anyone "judging moralizing behavior as immoral" is pre-Yellow. Heh.) Yellow is "context-aware" where finally, no one is trying to dominate another, and instead, they're just trying to understand. It is a fascinating model. Here is a very concise overview image. www.actualized.org/forum/uploads/monthly_2018_06/Spiral-Dynamics-Table-1.png.37224d8c494bb390a0938c03d0097c26.png Thank you for the video.

Great vid. Where would you place Victor Turner in all this?

Jung, one of the biggest hypocrites of the 20th century, who never understood Nietzsche, which is evident by him becoming a dialectician. Oh the poor souls with degenerative neuropathy and other invisible disorders who had to listen to this fool ramble on about his archetypes and shadow-work.

Jung was definitely a racist, but given his time and place it would be surprising if he weren’t a racist. This is not to forgive Jung for his racism, but it is to raise the question of why we should assume that the moral ground of the 21st century is surperior to the moral ground of the 20th? I mean, what makes it superior? What is the philosophical justification for accepting that it is. After all, isn’t this channel about philosophy not political correctness?

Where is mathematics placed?

Racism at its core is actually culturism

1:41 What do you mean?! It WAS Norm?

Do you know what North Africa was like in 1920? This is about Libya in the late 40s: "The country has no colleges, and only 16 college graduates. It has only three lawyers. There is not a single Libyan physician, engineer, surveyor or pharmacist in the land. No more than 250,000 Libyans can write their own names; the rest use thumbprints as signatures. Eye diseases, especially trachoma, are so widespread that 10% of the population is blind." Time Magazine "LIBYA: Birth of a Nation"

Phenomenologists are "right for wrong reasons", which means they are wrong.

🙄 Guess you’re a Breadtuber now. Hope it was worth selling your soul.

I was basically 'forced' into spirituality. The universe transformed me into my biological father, transferred his trauma onto me, punished me for his sins, and so I am having to heal 'his' crap through spirituality. And now the universe actually 'assumes' I am really into spirituality, and expects me to be grateful for healing the wounded me that was actually my father's wounds 'divinely transferred' onto me, the entire time

always a favourite topic!

I am hugely influenced by the philosophy of Nietzsche. The greater part of this influence has been not from his books but by thinking about his ideas and what I understand from them. I have also been influenced by another unique German philosopher, Max Stirner, who wrote The Unique and Its Property. Definitely recommend it to the lovers of Nietzsche. In the video, you say something like "acting on insticts, emotions and affirming life". I think this not in the terms of instincts or emotions but power as an umbrella term. Oversimplified, being autonomous is the philosophy of both Nietzsche and Stirner. You talk about dynamic forces and gods. This reminded me of the politheistic religion of Ancient Greece. I argue that in politheistic religions the connection between gods and men are not so alienated as it is in urban religions such as Judaism, Christianity and Islam. I believe that God or gods are the alienated form of our inner power. So, we are not really being 'possessed' (Apollon is speaking when we say possessed) by the gods but we are acting on our power, will. A naked expression of our unique existence. Hybris. We are destined to hybris. Hybris is not the line seperating our power from that of the gods. Hybris is our highest and truest potential. Becoming a God, just like we are physiologically supposed to be. These are the thoughts I arrived at in my time dialogues with Nietzsche and Stirner. Will be happy to hear your comment.

Neither Husserl nor Heidegger could comprehend subjective experience as being the product of formal computational processes. Both were deeply confused, myopic thinkers. Their failed perspective serve exactly two purposes now: (1) to confuse young minds and distract them from enlightened perspectives, and (2) as raw data to train AI/LLMs on the expansive scope of human ignorance and naivety. Continental philosophy is a dead field... literally now an intellectual wasteland. Nothing important will ever again come from it. And there is very little remaining of the Continental school except a disgusting assortment of hoary pipe-smoking, wine-drinking, cheese-nibbling professors attending serial dinner parties in the hopes of finding a wide-eyed, impressionable undergraduate to fuck, either literally or intellectually.

I hope ppl read islamic claims as understanding as possible like the man did here with jung . Good job

feeling is the true intellect

One day majority of wyatt ppl wull admit that they are and have always been racist... And then finally they can actually start doing something about it.

I believe that your misunderstanding probably comes from the meaning of the word "primitive," which was used by some anthropologists at the time, and also by Jung. It is not related to "inferior races," as you intended to suggest in this video, but rather refers to a more "original" state of the human mind, not yet influenced by the complex processes of civilization that often involve the repression of basic instincts. This also doesn't mean that modern societies are necessarily superior. Jung describes certain modern contexts as a "barbarian unilaterality" of certain psychic functions, and he also argues that a culture which fails to satisfy the complexity of human nature should not be called a culture, but a collective disturbance. Human beings will never be able to completely leave the primitive state, and it is highly questionable whether this would even be desirable. If you had read, for instance, the full biography written by Aniela Jaffé, you would see the great admiration for Native American culture, presented in a dialogue with a religious leader who criticizes the European way of thinking. It seems that the text fragments you selected were taken from a source aimed at discrediting a historical figure who has already been subject to a great deal of misinformation spread by certain intellectuals and interested opposers, especially Ernest Jones. I would truly recommend that you be more careful with this kind of accusations, even regarding the title of the video, and actually read the whole texts you are using.

People generally deserve better than to be slapped with a label like that. Even if he was an “anti” whatever I believe people are entitled to their opinions and Mr Jung definitely gave so much knowledge to humanity that this question is irrelevant to me.

Look into hermeneutics. A text should not be interpreted outside of it's historical context.

A lot of people throw around the word "research" without really knowing what it means. Developing a vaccine is research, you can see it with a microscope and verify the results. What Jung was doing was no different than magicians, priests, alchemist and other fake sciences. There was no scientific rigor to anything he did, nothing that can can be replicated and tested by peers to verify its truth.

Thank you for being nuanced, sir. ✌😎

It does not run into the heart of his theory. Just stop it. 🥴

based

Ok cool and all but where was he wrong exactly ?

What it the definitiknof a racist? It used to be that you decline certain opportunity to certain people nowadays what is it? In my opinion it is a very inflationary used word with no meaning at all.

Europeans who came here had to be tough, adventurous, and heroic to survive. It was a big country with many challenges to overcome to make it a nation. It has welcomed all peoples, all cultures, and all religions and is considered the melting pot of the world. Its idealism, success, and optimism has been legendary. We're not perfect, but no country is; but we are growing and evolving and trying to correct our mistakes and get better all the time.