2 жыл бұрын
2 жыл бұрын
2 жыл бұрын
2 жыл бұрын
2 жыл бұрын
2 жыл бұрын
3 жыл бұрын
3 жыл бұрын
3 жыл бұрын
3 жыл бұрын
4 жыл бұрын
4 жыл бұрын
4 жыл бұрын
4 жыл бұрын
4 жыл бұрын
4 жыл бұрын
Пікірлер
@jontijerina3340 Күн бұрын
JP-thank you so much for making these videos and sharing them. I was an atheist for a few years but I’m returning to my former Christian faith in a new way because of your and John’s and Kastrup’s work.
@trosenthal3711 Ай бұрын
What happened to the book?
@j.p.marceau5146 Ай бұрын
@@trosenthal3711 last update I had from the editor, I expect it'll come out in a matter of weeks now 🤞
@Professionallypessimistic Ай бұрын
Hi, great video. I am looking for examples of Bergson overcoming the combination problem in academic literature. Could you point me in the right direction? Also, have you published anything on the subject matter in the video that I could possibly reference? Many thanks
@j.p.marceau5146 Ай бұрын
Hey, I published an article in French on the topic a few years back: papyrus.bib.umontreal.ca/xmlui/handle/1866/19613 Google translate should do a pretty good job if you want to generate an English version. This bibliography entry is especially relevant: Čapek, M. (1971), Bergson and Modern Physics, Dordrecth, Reidel. Although I don't remember if it treats the combination problem in those terms. I think it covers the relevant ideas, perhaps just not with that exact terminology.
@Professionallypessimistic Ай бұрын
Something to explore. Thank you very much
@diggingshovelle9669 2 ай бұрын
The Trinity is inconsistent?
@TheVeganVicar 3 ай бұрын
🐟 24. ŚŪDRA (THE WORKING-CLASS): A WORKER (“śūdra”, in Sanskrit) is a man who is paid money, or some other form of compensation (traditionally, usually paid with food, clothing, and/or shelter, especially in communities that didn’t use money), to perform specified tasks for another person or organization (but usually on behalf of a businessman, since businesses and farm owners are by far the greatest employers of staff in a free-market economy). In my own case, I have employed several human beings to labour for my mission, in exchange for food, shelter, as well as copies of my hymnal. So, by definition, a democratically-elected politician is actually a member of the working class, and not a member of the ruling class, since he receives a set wage from his employers - the tax-paying public. However, because politicians are literally stealing the occupation of a monarch, they cannot truly be classified as workers, but as CRIMINALS. This applies to any other “work” necessitating immorality, such as prostitution, police and military personnel who serve illegitimate governments, and those industries in which animals are unjustifiably harmed, such as animal husbandry (otherwise known as animal agriculture), circuses, the fur trade, leatherwork, zoological gardens, and horse or dog racing. A TRUE king, on the other hand, would never condescend to such behaviour as being a politician. A monarch has been mandated to govern his people by a higher power, rather than the voting public, who will simply vote for a “leader” who will satisfy their whims, rather than discharge God’s perfect will (or for Atheistic readers, submit to the universal moral law explicated in Chapter 12 of this Most Sacred of Holy Scriptures). WOMEN are permitted to perform work only in dire circumstances, or when a certain task can be performed only by a female. Read the following chapter of this Holiest of Holy Scriptures in order to learn about the proper role of girls and women within human society. The essential role of a (competent) worker should be to follow the same process that ALL subordinates ought to follow with respect to their superiors (that being their masters and/or mistresses). That is to say, they should look at their master whilst conversing with him, carefully listen to what their master is positing, try to understand the said instruction (or else, request that their employer explain themselves in a more easily-understandable manner), answer their master (e.g. “Yes, Sir!” or “Okay, Boss!”) and dutifully accomplish the tasks required of them. This procedure may be summarized by the following FIVE steps: 1. look 2. listen 3. learn 4. answer, and: 5. obey N.B. Obviously, the term “worker” pertains solely to WORKERS. Therefore, those men who belong to one of the other three classes of society (namely, business owners, kings, and priests) should never be associated with the terms “work” or “worker”. A businessman does not work as such - he owns a mercantile enterprise. A monarch does not work - his divinely-mandated role is to rule a nation. Priests are not workers - their vocation is to teach all things necessary for human society to function smoothly (that is, law/dharma, yoga/religion, proper diet, et cetera). As mentioned in the first paragraph, work is an occupation that one performs purely in exchange for a set wage (either in cash or in kind). See also the entry “caste” in the Glossary of this Holy Scripture, especially if you happen to be in any way connected with Vedic culture. “You shall not oppress a hired worker who is poor and needy, whether he is one of your brothers or one of the sojourners who are in your land within your towns.” Deuteronomy 24:14, “Holy Bible”. “Your time is limited, so don’t waste it living someone else’s life.” ************* “Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do. If you haven’t found it yet, keep looking. Don’t settle. As with all matters of the heart, you’ll know when you find it.” Steven Paul Jobs, American Business Magnate. “He who stands on tiptoe doesn’t stand firm. He who rushes ahead doesn’t go far. He who tries to shine dims his own light. He who defines himself can’t know who he really is. He who has power over others can’t empower himself. He who clings to his work will create nothing that endures. If you want to accord with the Tao, just do your job, then let go.” “Dao De Jing” Chapter 24, Laozi (or Lao-Tzu). “In this age, the most common relationship people have with God is to be a thief of God - to try to take as much as possible.” ************* “The idea of being a servant of God is to be a total slave to God. It is in that slavery that we attain freedom”. Robert “Shunyamurti” Shubow, Abbot, Sat Yoga Institute, Costa Rica.
@richardkasper5822 3 ай бұрын
Elusinian mysteries aka as dionysian mysteries aka the works of the nicolaitans = the thing that Jesus hates.
@richardkasper5822 3 ай бұрын
I think the mystery religions played a huge part in Christs statements in biblical times. And people were trapped in their lives to them, the dionysian, elusinian, and all the small clan religions across the world were all based on sexual rites. I even believe that many of the Saints of Catholic and Orthodox Church were fooled by the demonic spirits of sexual magic.
@richardkasper5822 3 ай бұрын
Your answering questions i was to timid to ask anyone. And in a direct nature that goes beyond all the alchemical lectures ive listened to for five years.
@richardkasper5822 3 ай бұрын
Kind of like ferns that reproduce through spores that actually form the sex organs outside of the parent and then these same organs react to mist ( water) and in combination with the wind (the Spirit) fertilization takes place and eventually the zygote forms new plants . I tried this methoed on some ferns i grow as houseplants and it was remarkably easy and was fascinating to observe. But now i have a boatload of ferns 😳
@richardkasper5822 3 ай бұрын
Im new here but very impressed with your content.
@j.p.marceau5146 3 ай бұрын
Thanks Richard
@richardkasper5822 3 ай бұрын
Im finally understanding so much thankyou to this young man..
@aisthpaoitht 3 ай бұрын
Can anyone help point me to further reading for the following idea, which i am convinced of, but i need to follow up with all the implications: God's essence is infinite existence. Existence is consciousness. Thus, God is infinite consciousness. Reality exists as an idea in God (God's mind). Our essence is also consciousness/existence, but finite. Thus, we are created in the image of God. Thank you!
@j.p.marceau5146 4 ай бұрын
The course has happened and recordings are available here: thesymbolicworld.com/courses/symbolic-world-metaphysics The book is in the final stages before publication.
@guillaumerousseau7602 4 ай бұрын
Bonjour, est-ce que les cours ont été enregistrés et serait-il possible d'accéder au contenu?
@j.p.marceau5146 4 ай бұрын
Bonjour Guillaume Oui c'est ici: thesymbolicworld.com/courses/symbolic-world-metaphysics
@guillaumerousseau7602 4 ай бұрын
@@j.p.marceau5146 Merci!
@ourblessedtribe9284 5 ай бұрын
2 years later, listening again and gathering more than ever. Thank you both again
@charlessykes7161 8 ай бұрын
Even rocks have feelings.
@aryanz66 9 ай бұрын
I loved the Course.
@WilliamWilliams-f7t 11 ай бұрын
Palamism: In direct contradiction to Catholic theology, Palamite Eastern Orthodoxy considers Absolute Divine Simplicity to be the fundamental flaw in Thomistic Catholic theology. Just as the Absolute Divine Simplicity is the first and foremost principle in considering the Catholic view of the nature of God’s existence, so a fundamental division in the Divine, a Divine Duplicity, is the fundamental principal for understanding the God of Eastern Orthodoxy. This “Division of the Divine” is something which is posited between God’s “Essence” and His “Energies.” In Palamism, the essence of God is Absolutely Transcendent. He is beyond all Naming…Consequently, God’s Being, Power, Will, Love, Truth are not to be attributed to the “Essence” of God, but to His “Energies”. These “Energies” are to be seen as including all that is associated with what are called the “economies” of God - with everything which we associate with God “operating.” These Divine Energies, according to Palamism, must in no way be construed as constituting, or as being in any way identified with, the essence of God. In Gregory Palamas’ own words: “all these [the Divine Energies] exist not in Him, but around Him.” (The Triads, p. 97 - all quotes from Palamas are taken from The Triads, translated by John Meyendorff, published by Paulist Press). Further, the absolute non-identity of God’s energies with his essence is succinctly stated in the following passage: “But He Who is beyond every name is not identical with what He is named; for the essence and energy of God are not identical.” (Ibid However, the distinction between Essence and Energies goes much further than non-identity. It is an infinite distinction: “The superessential essence of God is thus not to be identified with the energies, even with those without beginning; from which it follows that it is not only transcendent to any energy whatsoever, but that it transcends them ‘to an infinite degree and an infinite number of times’, as the divine Maximus says.” (The Triads, p. 96) …According to Palamite theology the Names, economies, operations, and energies of God are not only real, but they are Divine and Eternal. They constitute every thing that is Divine, but is somehow compromised through dealing with anything in the universe that is outside of God’s absolutely transcendent essence. They might be defined as “Divinity in any way involved with, or compromised by, creation.” They are “the Divine outside of Transcendent God”, while at the same time being “the Divine in the world.” As we shall see, it is union with them, and not the Vision of the Essence of God, which constitutes Eastern Orthodoxy’s view of the final destiny of man. Simply and succinctly stated, Eastern Orthodoxy denies the reality or possibility of the Beatific Vision. The problem with such a theology, of course, is how to connect the absolutely transcendent God with the immanent Divine. According to Palamas, this transcendent God transcends the Divine Energies “to an infinite degree and an infinite number of times.” It is as though we have two Gods. To the first - the totally transcendent, ineffable, unknowable Divine - Palamas gives the Name God. But to the second - the Eternal, Uncreated “God outside God” - He only applies the Name “Divine.” How can we have two “Eternal Divines” without them being two Gods? His strange answer as to how this absolutely transcendent God can be connected to the energies runs as follows: “Essence and energy are thus not totally identical in God [to say the least: we are certainly right to question how something which infinitely transcends something else, and then infinitely transcends it an infinite number of times, could be considered in any way identified with that which it transcends], even though He is entirely manifest in every energy, His essence being indivisible.” In other words, Palamism presents to us an infinitely transcendent and unknowable God somehow un-transcending Himself and His transcendence in order to be entirely manifest in every energy. Again, we have the right to pose a question: How can a God Who is an infinity of infinities above His “Energies”, and is in no way to be identified with them, yet be “entirely manifest” in every one of them? It would thus appear that Palamism posits a God of Divine Self-contradiction as a logical and necessary consequence of the dualism which it has established in the Divine. James Larson: The War Against Being: Part III Eastern Orthodoxy: Never The Twain Should Meet - waragainstbeing.com/partiii/
@DeuxRexunifier 11 ай бұрын
Hello J.P. Can you give me a reading list of the books you will use in your classes on the metaphysics of symbolism? Thank you so much!!
@j.p.marceau5146 11 ай бұрын
Hey there, The main one will be a preview of my own book hehe Otherwise, here's the list - Zombies and Western Culture - Aristotle's Revenge - Unlocking Divine Action - Thinking Being: Introduction to Metaphysics in the Classical Tradition - Out of Our Heads - Attachment and Reflective Function: Their Role in Self-Organization - The Moral Mind - Skin in the Game - Miracles (by C.S. Lewis) - Design in Nature - The Catholicity of Reason - The Divine Names - The Whole Mystery of Christ - The Doors of the Sea - The Reign of Quantity and the Sign of the Times - Ordinary Work, Extraordinary Grace I'd say the most important are: - Aristotle's Revenge - Miracles - The Catholicity of Reason - The Doors of the Sea
@DeuxRexunifier 11 ай бұрын
@@j.p.marceau5146 You're very kind. I love your work and can't wait to read your book. I hope it comes out soon on Amazon or in pdf
@andrewx3y8c 11 ай бұрын
Panpsychism and Neoplatonism: Re-Enchantment for Mathematicians and Physicists had a big impact on me when I read it initially and I keep it saved to reread occasionally. Would be interested for sure.
@j.p.marceau5146 11 ай бұрын
Thanks, glad to read this. If you can make it: thesymbolicworld.com/news/symbolic-world-metaphysics-course-with-jp-marceau EARLY10 at checkout for 10% off today :)
@jovankojic2840 Жыл бұрын
Great conversation. Have you ever thought about the economic systems? I feel like, since the failures of socialism, everyone is kind of afraid to challenge the philosophical aspect of the economy. I have a degree in Economics, but I have to say I was very disappointed in how dry and shallow economics as a science has become, especially after discovering Symbolic World. If religion is put as the highest value in society, I guess that should reflect itself in the way we do business. For example, I read that some big company in Spain has limited the CEO's salary to be a maximum of five times the lowest wage in the company. So, in order for the CEO to raise his salary, he has to pull everyone up. This reminds me of the relationship between the highest and lowest that Christ establishes. I don't think anyone has a complete picture of what should replace capitalism and socialism, but my intuition is that we should try to draw wisdom from the Bible, connect the dots, and maybe experiment on a smaller scale first. It would be a great topic to be added to the Symbolic World discussion because this rule of money as the highest value, I am sure, will crash on our heads eventually.Love to hear you opinion and maybe you tackle this question in some article.
@j.p.marceau5146 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for the suggestion, I hadn't considered this as a research topic
@TheVeganVicar 3 ай бұрын
🐟 22. ILLEGITIMATE GOVERNANCES: SOCIALISM (and its more extreme form, communism) is intrinsically evil, because it is based on the ideology of social and economic egalitarianism, which is both a theoretical and a practical impossibility. Equality exists solely in abstract concepts such as mathematics and arguably in the sub-atomic realm. Many proponents of socialism argue that it is purely an economic system and therefore independent of any particular form of governance. However, it is inconceivable that socialism/communism could be implemented on a nationwide scale without any form of government intervention. If a relatively small number of persons wish to unite in order to form a commune or worker-cooperative, that is their prerogative, but it could never work in a country with a large population, because there will always exist entrepreneurs desirous of engaging in wealth-building enterprises. Even a musician who composes a hit tune wants his song to succeed and earn him inordinate wealth. Socialism reduces individual citizens to utilities, who, in practice, are used to support the ruling elite, who are invariably despotic scoundrels, and very far from ideal leaders (i.e. compassionate and righteous monarchs). Those citizens who display talent in business or the arts are either oppressed, or their gifts are coercively utilized by the corrupt state. Despite purporting to be a fair and equitable system of wealth distribution, those in leadership positions seem to live a far more luxurious lifestyle than the mass of menial workers. Wealth is effectively stolen from the rich. Most destructively, virtuous and holy teachings (“dharma”, in Sanskrit) are repressed by the irreligious and ILLEGITIMATE “government”. The argument that some form of government WELFARE programme is essential to aid those who are unable to financially-support themselves for reasons beyond their control, is fallacious. A righteous ruler (i.e. a saintly monarch) will ensure the welfare of each and every citizen by encouraging private welfare. There is no need for a king to extort money from his subjects in order to feed and clothe the impoverished. Of course, in the highly-unlikely event that civilians are unwilling to help a person in dire straits, the king would step-in to assist that person, as one would expect from a patriarch (father of his people). The head of any nation ought to be the penultimate patriarch, not a selfish buffoon. DEMOCRACY is almost as evil, because, just as the rabble favoured the murderous Barabbas over the good King Jesus, the ignorant masses will overwhelmingly vote for the candidate which promises to fulfil their inane desires, rather than one which will enforce the law, and promote a wholesome and just society. Read Chapter 12 for the most authoritative and concise exegesis of law, morality, and ethics, currently available. Even in the miraculous scenario where the vast majority of the population are holy and righteous citizens, it is still immoral for them to vote for a seemingly-righteous leader. This is because that leader will not be, by definition, a king. As clearly and logically explicated in the previous chapter of this Holy Scripture, MONARCHY is the only lawful form of governance. If an elected ruler is truly righteous, he will not be able to condone the fact that the citizens are paying him to perform a job (which is a working-class role), and that an inordinate amount of time, money and resources are being wasted on political campaigning. Furthermore, an actual ruler does not wimpishly pander to voters - he takes power by (divinely-mandated) force, as one would expect from the penultimate alpha-male in society (the ultimate alpha-male being a priest). The thought of children voting for who will be their parents or teachers, would seem utterly RIDICULOUS to the average person, yet most believe that they are qualified to choose their own ruler - they are most assuredly not. Just as a typical child fails to understand that a piece of sweet, juicy, healthy, delicious fruit is more beneficial for them than a cone of pus-infested, fattening, diabetes-inducing ice-cream, so too can the uneducated proletariat not understand that they are unqualified to choose their own leader, even after it is logically explained to them (as it is in this chapter, as well as in the previous chapter). And by “uneducated”, it is simply meant that they are misguided in the realities of life and in righteous living (“dharma”, in Sanskrit), not in facts and figures or in technical training. Intelligence doesn't necessarily correlate to wisdom. No socialist or democratic government will educate its citizens sufficiently well that the citizens have the knowledge of how to usurp their rule. To put it frankly, democracy is rule by the “lowest common denominator”. It should be obvious that ANARCHY can never ever succeed, because even the smallest possible social unit (the nuclear family) requires a dominator. Any family will fall-apart without a strict male household head. In fact, without the husband/father, there is no family, by definition. The English noun “husband” comes from the Old Norse word “hûsbôndi”, meaning “master of the house”. The same paradigm applies to the extended family, which depends on a strong patriarchal figure (customarily, the eldest or most senior male). Likewise with clans, tribes, villages, towns, cities, and nations or countries. Unfortunately, there are many otherwise-intelligent persons who honestly believe that an ENTIRE country can smoothly run without a leader in place. Any sane person can easily understand that even a nuclear family is unable to function properly without a head of the house, what to speak of a populous nation. The reason for anarchists' distrust of any kind of government is due to the corrupt nature of democratic governments, and the adulteration of the monarchy in recent centuries. However, if anarchists were to understand that most all so-called “kings/queens” in recent centuries were not even close to being true monarchs, they may change their stance on that inane “system”. Most of the problems in human society are directly or indirectly attributable to this relatively modern phenomenon (non-monarchies), since it is the government’s role and sacred DUTY to enforce the law (see Chapter 12), and non-monarchical governments are themselves unlawful. One of the many sinister characteristics of democracy, socialism, and other evil forms of governance, is the desire for their so-called “leaders” to control, or at least influence, the private lives of every single citizen (hence the term “Nanny State”). For example, in the wicked, decadent nations in which this holy scripture was composed, The Philippine Islands and The Southland (or “Australia”, as it is known in the Latin tongue), the DEMONIC governments try, and largely succeed, in controlling the rights of parents to properly raise, discipline and punish their children according to their own morals, compulsory vaccination of infants, enforcing feminist ideology, limiting legitimate powers an employer has over his servants, subsidizing animal agriculture, persecuting religious leaders (even to imprisonment and death, believe it or not. Personally, I have been jailed thrice for executing God’s perfect and pure will), and even trying to negatively influence what people eat and wear. Not that a government shouldn’t control what its citizens wear in public, but it should ensure that they are MODESTLY dressed, according to the guidelines outlined in Chapter 28, which is hardly the case in Australia, the Philippines, and similar nations. At least ninety-nine per cent of Filipinas, for instance, are transvestinal, despite Philippines pretending to be a religious nation. Cont...
@tuckeroliver8300 Жыл бұрын
Amazing. Is there a part 2? I can’t find it.
@j.p.marceau5146 Жыл бұрын
Thanks. We have not recorded it.
@McRingil Жыл бұрын
What Dr Vervaeke seems to miss (and I don`t blame him, it`s not clear in Clarke) is that each being in Aquinas has its own existence, each time you use the word "its existence" pointing to a thing you mean a different thing and it`s not just a matter of its essence. If it was really ONE existence and many essences then it would be a kind of pantheism although it would create problems with the potency inherent in the first cause: if the first cause is capable of realizing itself, constraining itself, it would have an inherent potency and would demand a more primary casue which would be pure act. That`s why Aquinas insists on the separation of God and reality, because change, multiplcity and coming to be requires an inherent potency, an essence allowing a thing not to exist. But God is pure act, incapable of not existing, if He changed he would require yet another cause and wouldn`t be God. If He came to be at some time it would mean he wasn`t God, because coming to be requires an actualization of potential essence. That`s also why in 21:00 John says that esse works bottom-up. Trouble with distinguishing act and potency, also ascribing causal power to potency. But potency is causally active only accidentally, only if it is act wrt to something else. But when it plasy the role of potency its receptive and Aquinas thinks of matter as receptive, not giving existence. Of course the matter we see is secondary matter which already was actualized. And for this reason it can act on other beings. But only after being actualized by form. Aquinas does not invert the scheme. God is pure act, one thing, pure form. But His form is unrestricted. He gives things their particular existence (their particular esse), this esse actualizes a potential essence, makes its existence determined. Regarding your troubles with distinguishing essence with forms: essence is neccesarily a form and sometimes a form additionally particularized in matter). For Aquinas the essence of a particular being involves matter if it`s required for its particularity. There are "general" essences but these exist only in thought, they are abstracted from particular beings. Sometime we talk of "the essence ofanimality" but ths is an abstract, the real metaphysical principle at work is particular essences of particular animals and these are differentiated by virtue of their secondary matter. Although they have a form common to their species, the same causal powers, that`s why general scientific laws can work, because they describe the causal powers of forms common to many things. Sometimes essences don`t require further differentation by matter, that`s the case for angels. Obviously we know that actualization of potency is simultaneous on all these levels of a being and it`s not like essences exist before coming to be actualized. My thomist professor says in regard to neoplatonism that Aquinas takes the structure of the neoplatonic world and puts it in inside a being. And it could be intresting to Dr Vervaeke, because it provides yet another phenomenological distinction. If what Aquinas talks about is particular esse then in a particular being, there is an aspect of actual existence - factuality and the second, intelligible aspect - of what exists and these are causally related as act to potency. John would say that the whole reality works like this, Aquinas talks about a particular being. The point is pure existence (God) doesn`t differentiate into particular beings. It creates other beings which are particular by virtue of their essences. Also there`s an incredible moment Dr Vearveke says in 23:45 that it is unclear to him "what is the one of THE esse". And it is sooo revealing aboout how he thinks of esse. As one, universal thing, in a kind of pantheistic way. But the metaphysical language of Aquinas is analogical. He doesn`t always mean one thing one he says "form", "essence" or "existence". These are roles played withing a being. According to Aquinas there are different existences, different beings with different esse. But there is one esse which is unrestricted, whose essence is "to be". This is the principle of God`s oneness, He`s the only pure act. But overall I`m really impressed that Dr Vervaeke takes the analysis so far and notices problems with his reading which are real problems. You were right in 44:30 that it all comes doen to an equivocation between the senses of existence and this is really the hardest problem of metaphysics. Aquinas does address thes issues in Summa Contra Gentiles, in De Veritate, De Potentia Dei most of all in a short treatise De Ente et Potentia (the most important work of him).
@trosenthal3711 Жыл бұрын
100% willing to participate, Central European Time though. Maybe you could also offer the recorded lessons in a way similar to what Jonathan Pageau is doing with his?
@j.p.marceau5146 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for answering! Yes, everything would be recorded. We decided to aim to run the course in early 2024, btw. Around the same time as the book, hopefully.
@j.p.marceau5146 11 ай бұрын
It's there, if you can make it: thesymbolicworld.com/news/symbolic-world-metaphysics-course-with-jp-marceau EARLY10 at checkout for 10% off today :)
@dmitrypetrouk8924 Жыл бұрын
Is there an article where the problem of meaning crisis was formulated and where solution was given (in relation to Maximus, Thomas Aquinas and Balthazar)?
@j.p.marceau5146 Жыл бұрын
The closest one I've written personally is thesymbolicworld.com/content/panpsychism-and-neoplatonism-re-enchantment-for-mathematicians-and-physicists For more, I'd recommend D.C. Schindler's _Love and the Postmodern Predicament_ or _The Catholicity of Reason_
@RaduBompa Жыл бұрын
i would be interested. i'm in eastern europe
@j.p.marceau5146 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for answering Radu! We decided to aim to run the course in early 2024, btw. Around the same time as the book, hopefully.
@j.p.marceau5146 11 ай бұрын
It's live! If you can make it: thesymbolicworld.com/news/symbolic-world-metaphysics-course-with-jp-marceau EARLY10 at checkout for 10% off today :)
@DerekJFiedler Жыл бұрын
Fantastic update.
@Andrew-AJNES Жыл бұрын
Thursday no earlier than 8pm eastern to accommodate Mountain and Pacific time zones
@j.p.marceau5146 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for answering! We decided to aim to run the course in early 2024, btw. Around the same time as the book, hopefully.
@j.p.marceau5146 11 ай бұрын
It's live! If you can make it: thesymbolicworld.com/news/symbolic-world-metaphysics-course-with-jp-marceau EARLY10 at checkout for 10% off today :)
@ChristopherDancy Жыл бұрын
@jp when do you expect the book to come out?
@j.p.marceau5146 Жыл бұрын
I would expect 6-12 months?
@ChristopherDancy Жыл бұрын
@@j.p.marceau5146 is that going to be through Pageau's print/press/label/whatever?
@j.p.marceau5146 Жыл бұрын
That is the plan 🤞
@billtimmons7071 Жыл бұрын
Short answer …. YES. Please do! I can do all North hemisphere time zones
@j.p.marceau5146 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for answering! We decided to aim to run the course in early 2024, btw. Around the same time as the book, hopefully.
@billtimmons7071 Жыл бұрын
@@j.p.marceau5146 Awesome. Thank you for doing this. I look forward to it.
@j.p.marceau5146 11 ай бұрын
It's live! If you can make it: thesymbolicworld.com/news/symbolic-world-metaphysics-course-with-jp-marceau EARLY10 at checkout for 10% off today :)
@trsteed123 Жыл бұрын
Would be very interested in this.
@j.p.marceau5146 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for answering! We decided to aim to run the course in early 2024, btw. Around the same time as the book, hopefully.
@j.p.marceau5146 11 ай бұрын
It's live! If you can make it: thesymbolicworld.com/news/symbolic-world-metaphysics-course-with-jp-marceau EARLY10 at checkout for 10% off today :)
@zappzapp00 Жыл бұрын
Sounds like a great idea! I wish you all the best with your course :)
@parkercoelho9036 Жыл бұрын
I am pretty interested and I'd probably be down for the $150 or whatever it is since I probably would give to your patreon if you had one anyway lol. I don't know that there is a time of day when I could commit to logging into a course though. It may have to be asynchronous for me. Best time if I had to choose though would be 8 p.m. PST
@j.p.marceau5146 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for answering! Yes, everything would be recorded. We decided to aim to run the course in early 2024, btw. Around the same time as the book, hopefully.
@j.p.marceau5146 11 ай бұрын
It's live! If you can make it: thesymbolicworld.com/news/symbolic-world-metaphysics-course-with-jp-marceau EARLY10 at checkout for 10% off today :)
@parkercoelho9036 11 ай бұрын
Im in :) Looking forward to it!@@j.p.marceau5146
@metaspacecrownedbytime4579 Жыл бұрын
I am very interested in a course, though I am in Australia so you are approx 17h behind. Your evenings are my midday. I would, without fail, acquire your book.
@j.p.marceau5146 11 ай бұрын
If you can make it: thesymbolicworld.com/news/symbolic-world-metaphysics-course-with-jp-marceau EARLY10 at checkout for 10% off today :)
@Valosken Жыл бұрын
I'm really looking forward to hearing about this metaphysics, but wouldn't be able to pay for a course. So I'll be sure to buy that book!
@codypond9170 Жыл бұрын
🎉🎉🎉
@the300XM8 Жыл бұрын
J.P., as a fan of your work and philosophy graduate I heavily recommend the book by Remi Brague "The Kingdom of Man". That is by far the best scholarly argument about failures of modernism, and I think you will find a lot there to strenghten arguments of your book. By the way, since Remi Brague is professor on Sorbonne I'm sure there is french edition. P.S. can't wait to order your book. Best of luck!
@TimAcademic Жыл бұрын
Yes! I read that book. One of the best books in contemporary philosophy.
@j.p.marceau5146 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for the tip 👍
@the300XM8 Жыл бұрын
@@j.p.marceau5146 I'm glad I can help my brother, keep doing the good work.
@thegoldenthread Жыл бұрын
I would be in. EST in the US. Starting at 6-7p my time would be great.
@j.p.marceau5146 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for answering! We decided to aim to run the course in early 2024, btw. Around the same time as the book, hopefully.
@j.p.marceau5146 11 ай бұрын
It's live! If you can make it: thesymbolicworld.com/news/symbolic-world-metaphysics-course-with-jp-marceau EARLY10 at checkout for 10% off today :)
@GRIFFIN1238 Жыл бұрын
I love your observations about the in-practice, almost unsuspecting convergence to the union of emanation and emergence - even in cases that propositionally shut out the possibility. Very helpful to keep that door open in my own thinking!
@demergent_deist Жыл бұрын
If of interest, I made a philosophical construction quite contra to Aquinas and Neoplatonism. And I think it is robust. In a nutshell: There is no more One. spirit-salamander.blogspot.com/2023/05/real-death-of-god-theology.html
@TheMeaningCode Жыл бұрын
Around 55:00 (and maybe you get to this later) the problem w Spinoza’s argument, according to Scripture, would be that we love because He first loved us. The idea that we are capable of loving the ground of Being fails on that account. If He is not a Person Who first loved us, we would be incapable of love in the truest sense of the word.
@christopherjohnson1873 Жыл бұрын
Vatican I condemns the idea that spiritual beings emanated from the divine substance
@mcnallyaar Жыл бұрын
That thing about hooking up mind and body is spot on. And its integrative monism with philosophy, theology, science, art, and business. 💯
@dubbelkastrull Жыл бұрын
11:13 bookmark
@ourblessedtribe9284 Жыл бұрын
In my life I think the very most important expereince for me to have my business be under my love for goodness was to start my adult life in the 3rd world where I volunteered and lived locally with very little. This is the one thing I am planning to strongly encourage my children to do. It taught me more wisdom than I think I could have possibly received if I hadnt left the western world/narrative.
@TheVeganVicar 3 ай бұрын
Good and bad are RELATIVE. 😉 Incidentally, are you VEGAN? 🌱
@ourblessedtribe9284 Жыл бұрын
Hi JP. I loved how you said about good parents allow their children to jump up the layers quickly. That fills me with hope.
@dubbelkastrull Жыл бұрын
15:40 bookmark
@YehudHalevi Жыл бұрын
John seems to say that being (created being) is for its own sake, and not ordained according to and toward anything outside itself. This seems close to the autonomy and even narcissism of the fall, where creatures rebelled against God, thinking they were ultimate, and forgetting they were for the sake of God. This points to a pantheistic and spinozistic tendency (deus sive natura). Mary on the other hand is saying that created being is ordained to and by God : it is not for its own sake but for God : it is a loving gift from God to be lovingly gifted back to God.
@YehudHalevi Жыл бұрын
I need God to love me. Or else I am nothing. I need God to love Mary and John and Jean-Philippe. He does. The Ground knows us, and loved us before the foundation of the world. In This love, He freely created us out of nothing. I desire nothing else than for God and I to love each other. What Spinoza said sounds very sad and lonely, and is opposite to the Jewish and Christian, at least, kerygmas.