Відео

God bless you. Love truly is deep and should be studied. May we increase in loving God and others.

Men without chests are currently destroying this world. More specifically, men without Christ have no chests. Men with intellect and no wisdom act as animals and are easier to pin up / against each other. I am just recently realizing this through therapy, prayer & Holy Spirit guidance. The decay of emotional control previously taught to kids is no accident and by design. We must fight this evil before it destroys our families, our countries & humanity as a whole. We know how this ends but we must not be passive, we must actively resist & even fight evil, until that end. Evil is never passive

So, is this part of the CS Lewis cult? Why don't you study the Bible with the Holy Spirit? What do you need CS Lewis for? Must be a cult.

He means men who needs to go outside, get some sun and have some physical activity

The best writers aren’t beholden to political correctness. C.S. Lewis was shunned by the chattering classes of his day yet is more influential in 2024 than his squishy Christian and militant atheist critics. Bravery ages well.

Of course they can. That is the purpose of Philosophy.

Excellent content! Thank you!

Love this! The concept of the “moral imagination” is lost on our generation just as Lewis explained. This video from Jordan Peterson illustrates this point as it pertains to childhood education to a degree: ua-cam.com/video/rlItMr2L-N4/v-deo.htmlsi=lD0Vp21Y84gGd1Tm

Bro you should grow out some mutton chops!

To provide an operational, rather than conceptual, definition of what Lewis meant by the phrase under consideration ... just look around ... they run all the institutions of society in the USA, and all western nations today. Or, if you prefer, think of Tolkein's Gollom. How are such people created? See Lewis' other description in the same book (The Abolition of Man) that says of their educational institutions: "We castrate and bid the geldings to be fruitful." Today's leaders of western nations are not capable of fruitful governance. They've been castrated by the removal--not of their nuts (would that it were so)--but of the Christian component in the overriding process of enculturation, which is broader and more inclusive than just formal education.

He means The Ark of The Covenant.

The Hebrew Bible could easily be said to be the history of man.

Scott Swain’s book is great! Not only does he really show the biblical sources but he brings the study of the Trinity always back to praise and worship of God. I was a little alarmed by Fred Sanders book. Perhaps I am wrong but he seems to regard Trinitarian theology as a background for the more important emphases of evangelicalism, such as biblical authority, the cross, salvation, and heaven. I think that is exactly backwards.

Here because of the O’Donovan thumb. Reading O’Donovan is difficult at first, but richly rewarding for his thought and endearing personality once you can just tread some water in his prose. O’Donovan is a master communicator and his description of the phenomenons of the moral life are so trenchantly apt. His employment of the term “pigheadedness” in a passage of Disappearance was like a tasting note in a fine wine that made me put the book down and just smile for a full minute, even if I don’t yet grasp half of everything else he is saying …

Appreciate your analysis good sir! Subscribed

What about "Men without Hats"?

Ah man, this world would get so boring, and it's already hellish enough. Imagine never dying, and having to witness war after war, siege after siege, disease after disease, see people grow corrupt, destroy an entire civilization, and then rebuild it, and once it got things just right, it gets corrupt again and falls apart. Or then someone gets the idea to put you into prison, because you're in the wrong country at the wrong time. I mean, even if the woman you loved were immortal too---and you two had the most passionate romance ever---it'd grow dim. Unless we ourselves were empowered by Christ's Holy Mind, we'd never be able to accomplish it. Which is another reason we need Christ to go to heaven. As eternity in our flesh minds and living in this world would be the utmost worst possible thing we could ever have done to us. It'd be even worse than perdition. I wrote a poem on that, called Hayden and Jaylah.

This adds more context to the song "Who wants to live Forever".

In a universe with the rule of entropy (which is of course not the only one in the physical world), eternal life is neither possible nor wishable. If never ending, it would mean the endless process of energy transformation in every kind without any real rest, it would mean that Heraclitus' view on the state of all things and beings ("You never enter the same torrent twice ...") turned into a neverending nightmare ...

I'm reminded of something I once heard that "the hardest part about being a superhero is that you have to win every time, but the supervillain only has to win once." If one were to live forever they'd undoubtedly become jaded in the sense that it can either be used as cynical or exhausted due to work. If you lived forever then you'd eventually end up in one of those two categories simply due to the nature of this world

He probably meant 'men without breast implants'. People were using weird words back then. Either way, clearly a transphobe.

maybe it means not a trans ?

Crosses, silver bullets, books ?

You misrepresent Andrew Tate. You are unfit to speak of men without chest because you have none as well.

Oh yes the only way to be a man is to keep your head down shut up go to work pay your taxes and don't complain and just do your part to make society better which means basically taking whatever they give to you and getting run over by society because the second you stand up you're no longer being a man cuz all you have time to do is work work and being a man has become defined as how much money you make and if you don't make enough money to support your family then you're not a man but it's not easy to make money anymore so there you go You got to be rich to be a man. You got to make $40 an hour these days to be able to afford a one-bedroom apartment. If you can't afford somewhere to live in your homeless then you ain't no kind of man cuz you're having a depend on somebody anyway so there's no win in this situation and you can't try to take this country back or you'll be thrown in prison and called a domestic terrorist

star wars too busy creating females that are perfect while the men in them are sexist and mistreat/trust women in the show, no shit anime is the new model for masculinity

You wanna look for matured masculinity in Japanese manga? Then read "Vegabond". It's a graphic novel adaptation about the life of Musashi Miyamoto.

There's definitely a point of no return when it comes to compromising morals. Mostly that those who witnessed or experienced consequences due to your compromise will likely see any attempt at correcting your morals as disingenuous acts. Even Thomas Jefferson noted that mixing The Church with politics would corrupt The Church. And ultimately there could be nothing more dangerous than someone who believes that any and all collateral damage is acceptable because the end they're fighting for is justified. To put in current pop culture terms: Peacemaker "I cherish peace with all my heart. I don't care how many men, women, and children I have to *unalive* to get it." It's why there are "rules of war." Granted, they're generally written by the victor, but everyone should have a line that they wouldn't cross. You draw that line, and if you can't hold yourself to that standard, then pray you have friends and family that can't let you know you crossed that line before you lose sight of the line entirely.

That has always been the case in any form of fictional media. American Comics did it first but now Japanese Manga are the new front of inspiration from fictional role models

So anime is like any form of pop culture where there are many sub-categories within anime, not all of which are (in my opinion) good to consume. Shounen anime, especially battle shounen, are essentially centered around masculinity. It's generally a young man/adolescent that has a call to action and must train to improve themselves to over come an obstacle. Odds are that a millennial who's into anime and is a regular gym goer was initially inspired by DBZ or one of the Big 3. On the other end of the spectrum there are simple slice-of-life that are very low-key, though one could argue that they all follow the cycle of challenge, failure, self-improvement (training arc), overcome challenge, and repeat

So then, read the breakthrough novel “Where Do We Go Now, LORD? - Burke.” This book has a 2,500 year breakthrough on the Book of Job. A fun read, yet quite ameliorating. Enjoy!

Abolition of Man 1943. The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe 1950.

COWARDS !

While character and morals MAY be taught , emotions are niether taught nor learned . Hatred is an emotion and even though one can instruct others as to WHAT or WHOM to direct their hatred , the hatred itself is either there or its NOT there , based upon the underlying physiological chemistry . Take for an example the reporting of a stock market crash to a swarm of mosquitoes. THEY GENUINELY DO NOT CARE AND POSSES NO NEED TO EXPRESS THOSE SENTIMENTS ( because they are not sentimental) . People often say " I dont care about this or that , but the fact that they posses some need to say this indicates a caring on some level and about something . Whereas, in the extreme case of an emotionless creature such as a mosquito , there's complete indifference , no passion AT ALL . No feelings and no potential to teach about feelings to them . People are somewhat varible in their emotions but that is not DIRECTLY up to them . We dont choose what we care about , or what we are indifferent to . This is not to say that its always unalterable , but the only control of ANYTHING comes through knowledge of its dynamics NOT wishful thinking . Ask a sociopathic serial killer how they sleep at night and they just might say ," sometimes on my left side , sometimes on my back ," in a total oblivion to your intended point . SO : You can dance if ya' want to ... oh wait , thats MEN WITHOUT HATS .

Thanks. that was a great explanation.

Lewis actually said quite a bit on this in his critique of scientism ua-cam.com/video/g8bngAg3abU/v-deo.htmlsi=-rppkLZ8UI-IkWWm

This is gold

Lewis here seems not to appreciate the practical consequences of abiding by the 10 commandments : through them, God trains the heart, and mind, of the obedient seeker. In other words, the royal path to "virtue" is already quite clear. What's Tate's moral deficiency, for instance? Covetousness.

Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." -John 14:6

Today we have people with chests (untrained emotions) but without heads (rationality). Philosophers begining with German Romatics and through Critical Theory and Postmodernism have lost their heads. What is needed is the full body of man.

It is interesting that we have passed through the "scientism" age and entered into a time when science, more and more, is presenting evidence of the necessity of a creator. Stephen Meyer has several books that speak to this (The return of the God hyphothesis, Signature in the Cell) as well as John Lennox and others. So science is coming full circle to say that it can't JUST be about the numbers and facts. There is absolutely something much more behind all of this. We do need to revive our hearts and souls and spirits, to revive our "chests", to see the created world as it is, fully, completely.

But where does Jack Sparrow fit into all of this? That’s the real question we should be asking.

He means that you need to do more push-ups. Hit the gym, bros.

I wonder how the permanent overstimulation of a city living and modern messed up sleep schedules factor into it: I can have long stints without internet that help nothing, and long stints on internet when I read books on online repositories or watch long movies or retrospectives on YT. With any kind of social medias, even my country’s version of Reddit and YT comments I notice emotional disregulation that follows spending time there. When I look back on any comment I made it’s like I was neurotic and brain-damaged, even my grammar gets laughably bad. I also did not notice bad symptoms of computers in my early life, just internet. It also fueled my sleep deprivation, I feel like in 3 years into getting an internet access I lost like 40IQ points, studying became impossible etc. But it was also a period when puberty hit and hormones can mess you up as well. It’s hard to tell why I became so dumb.

Lewis's position seems quite noble, yet I fear that this may lead to particular societal issues that we've already fallen into. While I agree that the examples you provided demonstrates the problem with the "utilitarian path" for a lack of a better term, it is a path in part counter cultural to ideological dogmatism that is very prevalent in the Unites States, and especially in higher education. One then wonders, what happens if our education is more moralistically driven? I fear that it might lead into a kind of dogmatism that shuns any thought counter to the status quo. I mean we already see it today. To bridge off your example mentioning Tate and the like, there are quite a fair amount of relevant and unsettling issues pervasive among men today. But the current ideological narrative is one that perpetuates a demonization of men- particularly white men. Any kind of productive conversation regarding such issues (such as suicide rates, education, and general loneliness) is met with resistance and condemnation, for such problems are treated as a zero sum game. I think what is most valuable is teach an axiomatic framework rather than an ideological one. Maybe this is what Lewis is meaning. A framework like: Human life is valuable. The liberties of an individual are to be respected. Furthermore, while I believe moral subjectivism is corrosive, the philosophical grounds for its rise yields another principle, one that is very fruitful. And that's the Is-Ought Problem. A lot of individuals, like Tate, will try to weaponize facts to make moral or ideological claims. I think we should counter these claims not by denying reality but by probing the justification for these claims. This is because facts are an insufficient justification for any particular moral claim. There must be an axiomatic link between the two. (The common rebuttal to social darwinism is a classic example of pointing out that the position encounters the is-ought problem, here called the naturalist fallacy). I don't think people do a good job of parsing facts from implications and conclusions people draw. We are so blinded by ideological dogmatism that we've lost the ability to think logically. And in fact this has lead to another kind of moral degradation, where bad faith actors weaponize facts to justify their own hypocrisies and vile beliefs.

How does this guy not have way more subscribers

C.S. Lewis famously coined the term "men without chests" in his book "The Abolition of Man." He used this phrase to critique a certain kind of modern education that, in his view, neglected the development of character and moral virtues in individuals. In the book, Lewis argues that there are three parts to human nature: the head (reason), the chest (emotion or sentiment), and the belly (appetite or desire). The "chest" represents the seat of human emotions and moral sentiments, such as courage, compassion, honor, and a sense of duty. Lewis believed that a proper education should cultivate not only the intellect (the head) but also the emotions and moral instincts (the chest). However, he observed a trend in modern education that focused excessively on intellectual development while neglecting the cultivation of virtues and moral sensibilities. He argued that this approach led to a generation of "men without chests" - individuals who were intellectually adept but lacked moral fortitude and emotional depth. These individuals might be clever and knowledgeable but were morally stunted, lacking the capacity for genuine empathy, courage, and a sense of higher purpose. Lewis saw this as a dangerous development because, in his view, moral values and virtues are essential for a well-functioning society and for individuals to live meaningful and fulfilling lives. He warned against the consequences of severing the connection between reason and emotion, arguing that it could lead to moral relativism, the loss of objective values, and ultimately, the erosion of human dignity and civilization itself. In essence, by "men without chests," Lewis was critiquing a modern educational philosophy that prioritized intellectual development at the expense of moral and emotional growth, resulting in individuals who lacked the moral and emotional foundation necessary for leading virtuous lives and contributing positively to society.

Bottom g