I appreciate this podcast in so many ways. Your devotion to a single Philosopher with the wide-range and many angles you take to get at him stands out. Thoughtful, well-spoken, and not centered on you and your image make this a model for what UA-cam could be.
One significant factor contributing to Nietzsche's madness is the profound conflict between his ideals and his personal limitations. He championed a philosophy of unapologetic acceptance of life, yet he was an exceptionally sensitive individual. This sensitivity is evident in his writing at times. In "Ecce Homo," he extols the concept of *amor fati*-the love of fate-but in the same work, he also states that the only excuse for God is that He doesn’t exist, revealing a deep-seated resentment towards the world. This internal contradiction between his philosophical aspirations and personal disposition likely exacerbated his mental struggles.
Me thinks his over thinking about his own egocentric nature drove him to madness. Have you noticed how agitated people with mental illness appear.?The egos destructive nature is on display. This is how the eastern philosophies counters the egos narcisstic awe of itself & is destroyed in deep meditation, which ironically enough stimulates the kundalini shakti=the jumping off place towards a higher introspection than the EGOS MACHINATIONS. Only in SAMADHI can the ego be destroyed.But what is SAMADHI.? Google search Ramana Maharshi-Be as you are Chapter 12 Experience and Samadhi...Sahaja samadhi-the unified field of awareness or Born Again when the ego is destroyed along with its subconscious mind-unconscious mind revealing the superconscious mind 24/7.Godspeed
@redguy2489 His intellectual hubris gifted him 1 thing:A critical thinking mind,like Ram Dass aka Prof Richard Albert's use of LSD gifted him you are not your thinking mind.Enter his Guru in Sahaja Samadhi Neem Karoli Baba. To understand Samadhi Google search Ramana Maharshi-Be as you are Chapter 12 Experience and Samadhi...Sahaja samadhi-the unified field of awareness or Born Again when the ego is destroyed along with its subconscious mind-unconscious mind revealing the superconscious mind 24/7.
“That, I thought, was his morbid misunderstanding: that he [Nietzsche] fearlessly and unsuspectingly let his No. 2 loose upon a world that knew and understood nothing about such things.” . . . “And he fell-tightrope-walker that he proclaimed himself to be--into depths far beyond himself. He did not know his way about in this world and was like a man possessed, one who could be handled only with the utmost caution.” (C. G. Jung, Memories, Dreams, Reflections) “When Zarathustra had thus spoken, one of the people called out: ‘We have now heard enough of the rope-dancer; it is time now for us to see him!’ And all the people laughed at Zarathustra. But the rope-dancer, who thought the words applied to him, began his performance.” “Zarathustra, however, looked at the people and wondered. Then he spake thus: Man is a rope stretched between the animal and the Superman-a rope over an abyss.” (Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra)
There is a depth of mystery one need never stop exploring, when it comes to the territory these 2 men dove into, at their own risk : it's a topic I'll never grow tired of. Multiple readings of Jung's Memories Dreams Reflections and Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil, and Thus Spake Zarathustra. So much yet still to wander through. Excellent work with this presentation!
Man. I'm fascinated by what I call " compensatory display" and it relationship to how our immune system works on the biological level. So often we meet people who are compensating for an inner frustration or attempting to work something out on a deep personal level, but much like those biological systems, we can take it to far , and end up cannibalizing ourselves. I believe jung was definitley wise to notice this lack of integration in nietchze,and so many of us. Great presentation as always.
I usually find it difficult to find good commentary on intellectual titans like Jung and Nietzschie because people speak about them as though they are super heroes, but listening to you makes me feel like both Jung and Nietzschie as just people. Don't get me wrong, I still find both of them to be true sages, but now that I see them as more human figure, their knowledge feels more understandable now. Thank you for the podcast, it was genuinely illuminating
I definitely noticed this in myself when I think about the ancient Greek philosophers, someone like Plato is like a mythical figure to me. At least I noticed it, but it's still not easy to be unbiased about their views.
… I think both men were great thinkers. I don’t think anyone can stand with Nietzsche as far as depth psychology and continental philosophy except Kirkegaard and Dostoyevsky. I would wager that both Nietzsche and Jung were at least honest in their own development of perspectives in trying to understand how this place works with all of the various variables that go into what a man is and what he can become. I do believe both had their own daemons running in the background (like computer scripts…not ironic that this is what they are really called in Information Technology )…because atheism and materialism were already dying it just took awhile for the stench to reach the populace. The only truly intellectually honest atheist is a nihilist and if that nihilist can pause his script for a second and look at the sheer impossibility of the evolutionary theory, the Big Bang, irreducible complexity, the Goldie locks phenomenon, Fibonacci sequence, fractals, etc…then he will quickly become some type of agnostic and be swept up by the Likes Of William James, Gnostics, Jung, etc…If that newly agnostic can keep going and trudge through that oneness modality mess and really start humbling themselves they may actually start beginning to understand and close in on the fact that there is a creator singular that is…now the task becomes who is the creator? I know Nietzsche and Jung’s own daemons, archetypes, etc…kept them running around trying to find out and figure out why reality seems to be able to provide both evidence for and against any particular view on almost any topic. This has become even more clear in the age of information. Nietzsche’s descent into madness was his will to order which became an actual possession! Jung it seems was able to stay a bit more fluid but just as deceived! Both of these men were deceived.
@@AjNotsri I think that the biggest barrier that keeps the vast majority of people who are trying to understand The One Creator is contending with the existence of tragedy and evil. "If God is all good, why does evil exist?" or "If the universe is truly neutral and devoid of meaning, why do objectively bad things exist?" etc... I like Jung and Nietzsche a lot and regarded them as superheroes because they gave me mental tools to approach this barrier. Nietzsche by questioning morality, which helped me remove it from its status as an absolute thing, and Jung with his research on the Self helped me understand that God didn't make a mistake by creating evil/tragedy and that Jesus and Satan are one and the same because Jesus, being an image of the Self, must include its evil side in order to be whole and perfect, which he has in Satan. Even this understanding by itself might be too much for those trying to understand The One, if they haven't gone through the transformation that you described. I don't imagine that someone who hasn't lost their adoration for conventional images and icons, just to later rediscover that same adoration after falling in love with the orderly chaos of Existence, could ever come to terms with a Oneness that allows Evil / Tragedy to exist... because that would require them to also accept their inate and enacted human evil. Something akin to crashing headfirst into Nihilism at 300 Km/H.
Hello hello thinkers. I would recommend to all of you the book "Nietzsche and Jung: The Whole Self in the Union of Opposites" by Lucy Huskinson. The book is derived from her doctoral thesis. What is important in this work is something similar to the content of this video - the similarities and differences in the thoughts of these two. Additionally, the book is an excellent review of all works by Nietzsche and all works by Jung through the prism of the "struggle" of opposites. The book also provides a good insight into the pre-Socratics, such as Heraclitus. There is a thread that connects these things and I think it leads very interestingly and intuitively to Bergson, Deleuze, and I will highlight Whitehead with his "philosophy (theology) of process". Finally, you should know: Support for this channel also from Serbia, I will try to spread the commendable work of this channel. Bravo!
As the internet becomes more isolated and crazy, I'm finally going to get back into reading books lol, and I think I'm gonna start with this one. This sounds right up my alley. Thanks
Thanks for this book suggestion, and greetings to you in Serbia. I visited your country 3 times last year and look forward to visiting again. прелепи Београд!
… I think both men were great thinkers. I don’t think anyone can stand with Nietzsche as far as depth psychology and continental philosophy except Kirkegaard and Dostoyevsky. I would wager that both Nietzsche and Jung were at least honest in their own development of perspectives in trying to understand how this place works with all of the various variables that go into what a man is and what he can become. I do believe both had their own daemons running in the background (like computer scripts…not ironic that this is what they are really called in Information Technology )…because atheism and materialism were already dying it just took awhile for the stench to reach the populace. The only truly intellectually honest atheist is a nihilist and if that nihilist can pause his script for a second and look at the sheer impossibility of the evolutionary theory, the Big Bang, irreducible complexity, the Goldie locks phenomenon, Fibonacci sequence, fractals, etc…then he will quickly become some type of agnostic and be swept up by the Likes Of William James, Gnostics, Jung, etc…If that newly agnostic can keep going and trudge through that oneness modality mess and really start humbling themselves they may actually start beginning to understand and close in on the fact that there is a creator singular that is…now the task becomes who is the creator? I know Nietzsche and Jung’s own daemons, archetypes, etc…kept them running around trying to find out and figure out why reality seems to be able to provide both evidence for and against any particular view on almost any topic. This has become even more clear in the age of information. Nietzsche’s descent into madness was his will to order which became an actual possession! Jung it seems was able to stay a bit more fluid but just as deceived! Both of these men were deceived.
@@AjNotsri Your thinking is interesting, especially in light of the fact that I have recently been encountering texts (specifically an audiobook) by Justin Popović, a Serbian theologian and priest who was educated at Oxford and who dealt with the philosophical and theological analysis of characters from Dostoevsky's novels. I was actually surprised at how Dostoevsky had already posed all the possible questions that confront humanity through the dialogues of atheist - theist, moralist - immoralist characters. Your statement that an atheist can only be a nihilist is something that was also a natural conclusion in Dostoevsky, which St. Justin Popović pointed out. On the other hand, there are scientific facts that you mentioned which are difficult to refute or interpret (or perhaps they don't need to be interpreted), and they remain.
Lately it occurs to me that Neitzshe was one of the few philosophers who lived as he thought. His final years were famously spent in silence categorised by commentators as an mental illness of unknown aetiology. What if this was not pure "will" to explore the precipice and become anchorite. Oh and there it's now talked about in this post.
56:44 I love measuring someone’s soul based on how much truth they can tolerate. After the last few years I appreciate and value so much more than before, someone’s ability to handle difficult truths about our reality. I never realized how few people can actually handle the truth whole truth. I figured it was maybe 40-50% of people that could be described that way. But after the pandemic and all of the other revelations, revelations about our governments and institutions, the way the world works, over the last decade I realize it’s more like 5-10% of the population that can actually stand the truth.
In light of the current political climate, the mind boggles at what you would characterize or define as 'the truth.' It seems evermore to mean whatever you choose it to be, regardless of how far it strays from someone/everyone else's truth. Good luck with trying to convince others of your interpretation of it. That is the basis of the individualistic, relativistic notion of 'truth.'
I agree with you. There is truth and there is reality. Neo Marxism strives to convince us otherwise. The idea is to create cognitive dissonance, confusion and demoralisation. In particular over identity. What people find most difficult is the depth and breadth of evil being perpetrated upon us. 100 years of psychological research into human behaviour is being employed to effect mind control and shape behaviour. This is mainly constant exposure and repetition of what they want you to accept. They use fear as motivation as people "herd" with the majority when threatened. They researched the medical field as being the most efficacious to induce this behaviour. They invested a lot of time in creating specialised "experts". The news readers held their positions over many decades to form a relationship with people. The manipulation of the statistics and the use of modelling also comes from Psychology. They discouraged critical thinking in education and stopped educating people and started training them instead. They projected larger numbers of compliance than actually existed so that people would cleave to the "majority". Nothing was done that was not meticulously planned. If you know and love our creator God then you can understand evil and protect yourself from it. Faith gives protection from fear. They know 15% of people cannot be hypnotised. That's why the censorship was so strong and unforgiving. They divide to conquer. God had to "die" to create the environment in society conducive to their plans. These plans are made hundreds of years in advance and carried through generationally. Technology has given them the means to potential absolute control. Evolution was introduced to undermine God. People want to be seen as "educated" and "intelligent". They get people to invest and implicate themselves and when they do it's so much harder to admit that you were fooled and partly culpable. They are occultists from the old Mystery Schools. They have been around for thousands of years but remained hidden. It helps if you have read the Bible but most people haven't. This is why they hate Christians. All of this is no surprise to us. They worship the adversary. They are a sex and death cult. Murderers and liars.
But is denial, denial, and demolition your standard of truth and a standard for intellectual independence, like Nietzsche’s method, for example? Goethe faulted Voltaire for his negative mentality and said that what he affirmed was no more valuable than what his old mother affirmed. That is, the value of human beings is what it proves, not what it denies Do not imagine the truth as a denial or contradiction to the majority, and consider it without criterion an indication of uniqueness and the power to bear the truth.
Nietzsche changed the direction of my life. I love the measured reason with which Jung brings clarity to Nietzsche's very emotional philosophy, that is so experiential an absorbing. Thank you for this. I was fortunate to have met one of Carl Jung s associates before he died. The reverence he held for Jung and the companionship of those that worked with him was something I will always remember.
Being 74 years old and my Grandmother was a Lutheran from Germany heritage while my Grandfather was Danish and he lived to the age of 91 . He would tell me stories about his childhood and his life until I was 23 years old. I have his old Double barrel 16 ga. Shotgun and his fly rod being made of split bamboo and the flys he made. Being the oldest of 7 children I feel so Blessed to have known all of my Grandparents and my brothers have asked me about them. My Grandparents on my Mothers side were German females and Irish and Danish on the Male side. I told German when I was in Junior High School . Thank you for giving me the opportunity to express myself. Personally I have become a Gnostic and follow The Book of Enoch, I only wish that my Grandfather could have seen these writings.
I think there's enough documentation about Nietzsche's physical illness driving him into ?insanity? to say Jung and many others unfairly judge his insanity as a pure insanity unaffected by illness. In truth I believe Freud and Jung were far more indebted to Nietzsche than they wanted to admit. He was a brilliant thinker with concepts that opened their eyes. I prefer to think of Nietzsche as Walter Kaufman did as deserving to be known as a great thinker.
Only sane comment. Was getting nauseous with all the Jung dickriders. I’ll be frank, Jung is having a moment because Peterson cant resist name dropping him. History had mostly forgotten about him and after Peterson goes Jung will go with him
The seminars on Zarathustra mentioned here went on for May years and the book is about 1400 pages, so you can't reasonably doubt that Jung considered him very important
The same photo on the front of a book by him..my pal put a sauve ket moustache on him and still has the screensaver 20yrs later ...it's slowly becoming an archetype
Thanks for looking at this from all sides. I was fortunate to have Dr. Marion Woodamn as a high school English Teacher for five years. In my graduate year, she left teaching to attend the Jungian Institute in Switzerland. Later, she became an international icon in Jungian Psychology, an analyst, and the author of five books. I was raised a Christian, so I understood well the opposite views of Philosophy and Psychology. She would talk about them from time to time. Certainly, when entering university, I was way ahead of the game due to her teaching, which most had no clue about. I actually entered therapy, and the Dr said I was obsessed with the mind. Much due to it was the waters I was raised in. I always emphasized that one, when reading Nietzsche, should first read the great works he challenges or inverted as his personification of the antichrist that came before him. I want you to know that you are well presenting the philosophers who influenced Nietzsche. IT IS IMPORTANT! Many read Nietzsche as a comic book hero and hang on his every word rather than critically sorting it through to see the underlying works he changed from its religious and philosophical form into psychology. Many use the term inflated in everyday language, though in its proper context, as you refer to Jungs analytical view as a persona identification with an archetype. Nietzsche's persona identifies with the saviour complex (Christ) and wisdom ( Sophocles), wanting to cause a paradigm shift by knocking the pillars down rather than as a bridge. He, in fact, horrified the reader through his violent obsession. Jung has the psychologist tempter to absorb and listen before analyzing what he is trying to say. Your wording as a skit of the story of Abraham is biased toward Nietzsche; you have God telling the man to kill his child. Though he left out the angel's voice ( as in the Bible), it became his enlightened consciousness, raising him from the unconscious to consciousness. In psychological terms, ego awareness is where he chooses not to, as in Jung's psychology. Nietzsche would have no part of consciousness. Thanks again.
Fabulous program.I am so deep into this program. The day after Orthodox Easter Pascha. The Church is darkened at Midnight and a one holy flame ignites all the candles and the members walk by in procession circular-everyone must leave the Church and the Priest is the one last out. On returning, he bangs the wooden cross loudly 3x on the door and shouts Open the Door! The members follow him back to the transformed Church.
I also greatly enjoy the expansion beyond Nietzsche but appreciate your desire to keep the podcast centered on him. I found these two episodes on Jung very valuable and essential to better understand Nietzsche. Thank you!
Thank you very much for delving into, I do not have the time nor the will to sit down and read these books but am very interested in them. I find it hard to understand them sometimes. You have helped my understanding of philosophy 10 fold, thank you again.
Yeah, as someone with ADHD, I get too distracted to sit down in a quiet room and read a book. I can't stay still, I hate doing things in a linear fashion, I have to be exploring, creating and thinking my own thoughts, and these podcasts help me to process this information in a characteristically less strict, less linear fashion.
So happy the algorithm gifted me this. Even happier when I saw the quality of the comments. I will both listen to and read all. What a beautiful community I stumbled into.
I’ve only read Jung’s Man and His Symbols. I’ve listened to many talks like this about his life’s work and my inevitable deep dive into the rest of his work is essential and over due. Talks like this rekindle my excitement for knowledge I’ve yet to receive. My interest has been focused on Hegel for the last few months and I’ve been avoiding studying these two thinkers alongside each other, but after this episode I think I will.
I was listening to a completely unrelated video while decorating my new apartment and when it ended your video (quite thankfully) was next on autoplay. Having had a philosophical mind since my young teens I'm always interested in and in search of channels like yours. I'm tremendously grateful for having been newly introduced to your channel. With love and appreciation from a new subscriber who's excited to listen to more of your older and all of your new to come videos.
"Mystical explanations are considered deep. The truth is that they are not even superficial" - Nietzsche foresaw Jung and those like him by a long shot
@@Laotzu.Goldbugexactly both understand and disagree with eachother whilst being right and wrong in different bits of their holistic views on the world, in my opinion. I think the right way to analyse them is to understand what they get right from them and why they were also wrong in other ways.
@@HiperStyle Indeed. Conversely I think there is no darwinism in Jung’s mind. Nevertheless Evolutionary Psychology in one side and Collective Inconscious and Archetypes in the other, have much in common. Jungians and Evolutionary Psychologist should think and work together!
41:55 Your summarized opinions at this timestamp, are spot on imo, well done. Jung was probably in some sense, too much of a speculative mystic, and Nietzsche, probably too much of a disagreeable cynic. Nevertheless, there have hardly been two, more brilliant individuals in the past few centuries, and any thoughtfully derived 'synthesis' of their work is guaranteed to be fruitful.
Poor Nietsche. His dad died at 35 of an 'agonizing' brain disease, which Fredrich feared he had inherited. After years of bad health, he collapsed and descended into dementia and paralysis. Imagine having that hanging over you all your life.
18:05 I do a lot of yelling myself! It's only because I'm still at the early stages of figuring out how to talk about what I've been learning! Because the way I learned it isn't necessarily the way everyone else will/can learn it!
Really great talk. This is the first video I've watched of yours and you seem to have a way of presenting ideas fluidly, embedded within a greater narrative that makes the talk easily comprehensible
@@antoineduchamp4931🤯 wow happened to me as well. When I found Jung I came to the conclusion that that was the way how god's were created by the human mind. And Jung help us a lot on how to deal with our self and also connect us with the divine.
Damn dude you just got yourself a subscription..you did an excellent job of breaking all this down. I was able to follow you all the way threw with out losing any focus and or interest. Keep sharing/making content 🤙🏼
I like the way you take me with you to your new found compartments of the boat , where one realises that life is but a drean and all one to do is to keep rowing. These men, you included may be the wood work that makes the strong boat that takes anyone that finds themselves on board.
At 38:38, you use the phrase "Terror Management Theory" in speaking of the notions of Freud. Since the 1980s this phrase was adopted to refer to the work of 3 experimental social psychologists who set out to test the theories of cultural anthropologist Ernest Becker. Upon hearing the phrase here, I couldn't help wondering if Freud actually used it, and also whether you have heard of the TMT studies I refer to; one of the psychologists, Sheldon Solomon, is a friend of mine. The Ernest Becker Foundation dissolved last year and many members would not discuss the work of Jung with me, they tending towards rigid secular materialism. Delighted you are using him in your interpretations here as I believe Jung's ideas will finally have to be considered in any comprehensive survey of the psychological nature of Humankind.
After all these listenings, I just realized that Jung only needs the idea of god for his idea to be true. Sometimes we listen so intently for one idea, we miss the obvious.
You have isolated just the portions of writing I wasn't sure I was looking for. Carl junior especially was so prolific that once you find a particular point of interest it's hard to sort through the whole corpus of work four other mentions related to that same subject. Thanks because my own efforts of study are impaired by disability illness and such I often find myself caught up and study for hours but with work so vast hard to tell if I've gotten anywhere on any particular idea. Then mentally and physically exhausted with what feels like not much to show. Always rather I have been impatient and lacking in concentration so this obviously helps focus
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." This is what came to mind listening to this, and I really couldn't help feeling that the Nietzschean abyss Jung stared into stared disturbingly back at him with a mocking refrain of, "Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones." What do I mean by this? Well, I believe Jung's charge of insanity against Nietzsche, his accusation of archetypal inflation this is could just as easily be hurled back in Jung's own face. For didn't Jung himself admit to an act of mediumship when receiving his Seven Sermons To the Dead? Perhaps we can even take this further and make the claim that Jung's Seven Sermons To the Dead was just his attempt to try and reach the same heights/depths of insight that Nietzsche achieved in his Zarathustra? That Jung's sermonizing Basilides was just a copycat Zarathustra, and that his "dead" were just the Last Men that Nietzsche/Zarathustra had prophecized against years earlier? Yes. I really can't escape the feeling that Jung, by hurling accusations of insanity at Nietzsche's literary ghost, wasn't perhaps trying to deflect inquisitive readers from perhaps drawing certain conclusions of their own regarding Jung's influential "proximity" to Zarathustra. Yes. I do believe that Jung doth protest a little too much in this regard.
One thing overlooked in Neitzsche's writings is his excellent sense of humour.Many times after he rounded off an aphorism with a witty expression I would vurst out laughing.like many men of an intellectual nature I imagine Neitzsche to have been a man of a lusty temperament and a powerful libido and he may well have found a release in brothels .
The problem with Jung is that he attributes shared mythologies to inner psychic truths when they are more realistically attributable to shared ancestry or from spread. For example, while it's true that we see dogs associated with death among native American tribes and European peoples, it is also true that both of these groups descended from a common ancestor, the Ancient North Eurasians, which others, like say the Austronesians or Africans did not. So it is likely that this was a mythical invention of the ANE peoples, and it has survived in one form or another among their descendants. Or the Chaoskampf. Whether it started as a Proto Indo European Myth or a proto semitic myth, it spread from these not too distant regions and their descendants, giving rise to Zeus vs Typhon, Marduk vs Tiamat, Thor vs the World Serpent, etc, just as the chariot spread from the Indo Aryans to the rest of the Bronze Age world. People interact, and spread religious ideas. Aphrodite came from the Phoenicians, who in turn got her from Ishtar. Zeus, Tyr, Jove, Tiwaz, and hte other sky fathers of Indo European myth aren't manifestations of some ancient Archetype, but descendants of the same ancient Indo European god. Comparative Mythology has discredited Jung, in my opinion.
Really great dialogue on these thoughts. Nietzsche was a key to my juvenile insight, and absolutely influenced my philosophy. As I've aged, though, I've gravitated to Jung's thought. I think Jung's effort is also universally valuable, where Nietzsche's is niche. Both undoubtedly have their place. All that said... I wonder what Nietzsche's output would have been had he married the woman of his fancy.
All his life, Jung was frightened that he would become mad, like Nietzsche. And he did, after his breakup with Freud. Unlike Nietzsche he recovered and used his experience of psychosis constructively. This fear, however, and posthumous rivalry, robbed him of compassion for Nietzsche.
Sadly, some of these comments are made not by persons who know Nietzsche’s writings and biography well, but desperately want to appear important. NB Nietzsche despised pity which is rather different from compassion. His correspondence reveals that he had too much of compassion, and his ‘mask of hardness’ was a defence against it. In effect, a defence against himself.
@@emmabovary9374 Original "Mitleid" definitely translates "compassion" and aparently google is full of experts who just want to appear important: ..."Nietzsche is known for his penetrating critique of Mitleid (now commonly rendered as “compassion”). He seems to be critical of all compassion but at times also seems to praise a different form of compassion, which he refers to as “our compassion” and contrasts it with “your compassion” (BGE 225). Some commentators have interpreted this to mean that Nietzsche’s criticism is not as unconditional as it may seem - that he does not condemn compassion entirely. I disagree and contend that even though Nietzsche appears to speak favorably of some forms of compassion, he regards the nature of all compassion to be fundamentally bad. Furthermore, I suggest that Nietzsche’s discussion on different forms of compassion have significant implications for achieving greatness and meaning in life. More specifically, I argue that, for Nietzsche, “our compassion,” however regrettable qua compassion it is, may give occasion for a rare and peculiar insight into “co-suffering” with others, which in turn results in overcoming compassion entirely. I also argue that although Nietzsche objects to compassion, he approves of a form of what feminist theorists might now call “anticipatory empathy.” Even though a large body of literature has evolved over Nietzsche’s critical evaluation of compassion, his understanding of a non-compassionate response to suffering is, in my view, rather overlooked and should receive more attention. abstract from "Nietzsche’s Compassion Vasfi O. Özen" being jutst one of the many expert opinions. But if you think your opinion is the only holy truth just enjoy.
I haven't read the seminar about Nietzche but taking into account Jung's diagnosis of Joyce's daughter, Lucia, I wonder if Jung considered something similar thinking about Nietzche: “Doctor Jung, have you noticed that my daughter seems to be submerged in the same waters as me?” to which he answered: “Yes, but where you swim, she drowns.”
Nietzsche was impressive for the exact reason that he created a work that transcended the limitations of the philosopher, unlike other philosophers who limited themselves to the barriers of their own reason, Nietzsche perceived the void of the "death of god" and really went to the end and transcended himself , his life apparently going on a different path from his philosophy itself shows that even though he suffered from Cadasil due to his father's genetics, with intense intellectual activity he prolonged his life span and managed to overcome his living conditions within the scope of his work, thanks for the Deleuze's quote btw.
@@Dunge0n Yep, This kind of thing his life is full of and he managed to channel the opposite in his philosophical work, different from Schopenhauer, that some would even say had a better life
@@nebula_Mage It's really just simple stubbornness, in my opinion. A bit more verbose and erudite than people are used to, but still. I often think Nietzche would have rather simply "lost his mind" through intense exercise than words, if his health wasn't so cursed. Instead he had to 'convince' himself to go on, like so many do, with self-penned gospels of 'hope': denying death.
@@nebula_Mage Honestly I don't find much admirable about life or how he, or anyone, decides to 'tame' it. Nobody ever succeeded. I've never liked negotiating with the dragon that's gonna eat me in the end. There really isn't an end to the anti-human horror I'd authorize, if it somehow made me immortal.
@@Dunge0n agree 100%, I'm not really talking about him, about his life, how he lived, I'm not admiring a person but rather how exactly his work ends up being impersonal and much bigger than him, as if he had really surrendered to a random impersonal unconscious aspect, it has elements who are similar to him but there are so many things so far from who he was that it really seems like something of collective unconsciousness, or just some reverberating atavism even
The thing is that psychoanalysts are the most aphysical people around, Nietsche at least was propelled by chronical headaches, which is unlike emotions a highly physical experience.
This is so good! This is an example of the information revolution's profound side. Can I ask you to please never start using AI for narration? AI has its place, but please inform us if you do choose to use it. Its getting harder and harder to discern. But it matters. On some level it affects us, even when we cant consciously catch it. We need human voices talking to us now. Thank you and thanks to everyone else that keeps engaging and expanding my mind. In stead of numbing it with bite sized and harmful dopamine hits. Big fan
7:28 People know Marx said, "Religion is the opiate of the people," but not that he says two paragraphs later, "The criticism of religion disillusions man, so that he will think, act, and fashion his reality like a man who has discarded his illusions and regained his senses, so that he will move around himself as his own true Sun. Religion is only the illusory Sun which revolves around man as long as he does not revolve around himself." - Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right Marx wanted man's ego to be 'lord of the universe' as stated here. Marx was also obsessed with Mephistopheles in Faust, who you mentioned was a trickster figure in the archetype video; Marx's favourite quote of Mephistopheles being, "Everything that exists deserves to perish." I'm not religious, but it's just fascinating to see this.
My father once told me that madness, depression and despair justify itself. Describing it makes you emphatize with it, thus descend into it. The real answer to despair is emptiness that lies beneath
@regimentsystem3306 I interpret this as: If you try to rationalise/make sense of your disorders, you'd trick yourself into normalising it. You then wouldn't try to pull yourself away from it due to "Well, logically, this is what should happen. So I'll let it happen". The only way you could solve the problem is (now this is the part I'm confused about) - recognising that rationalising without improvements is futile (can't just sit there and think) OR - recognise the dire aspect and push into action first and foremost (do now, think later) If this is what he truly meant, I don't particularly agree
@@MANFAQYOU as someone who has had severe mental problems from childhood trauma and cured all of them over the course if 10 years without the help of spineless professionals, this is all a bunch of rubbish to me. Srep one is knoe thyself, Step two is to know the enemy/issue, understand why it is here and how it is sustained, understand the mechanisms and weak spots. Step three is Cut off its supply lines, strike surgically and put something positive into the hole where the enemy once dwelled. Mental health is war, so nothing can be achieved without good reconnaissance, intelligence, and the intention to win. Displace the enemy, settle his territory, or help allies settle in the enemies territory. Conquest.
@@MANFAQYOU Excuse me if I confused you all. I generally like to pick up high end statements and questions, because it makes me think. I spent 2 years depressed and constantly ruminating about emptiness, and all the bad gibberish in my life, until I realized that my lifestyle and thoughts justified the depression. I was finally able to see depression being something other than myself, like a tiny layer of ungratefulness resting ontop of my head and colliding my thoughts against each other into a black hole of self loathing. I realized then (few years ago) that depression is not a sickness but a trap
And Nietzsche was the cause for Jung's own break with reality, maybe even multiple times. He even feared he may have had schizophrenia(funny how it means a split mind/consciousness/personality) as a result of the deep thinking about meaning and purpose he found within the philosophy of Fred... 5:00 I would push back and point out that the quote about religion was one of a religious view to life, one not unlike Fred - In that gott ist tot because we no longer believe. I will put the Jung quote below. Among all my patients in the second half of life-that is to say, over thirty-five-there has not been one whose problem in the last resort was not that of finding a religious outlook on life. It is safe to say that every one of them fell ill because he had lost what the living religions of every age have given their followers, and none of them has been really healed who did not regain his religious outlook. As Jung and Campbell would point out: Tat Tvam Asi - We are as God - and it is the self and the sacred within that we are missing, or overlooking - A phronesis is required - not a major shift - An awakening to the truth we used to know but forgot - Anumana in Sanskrit... 14:45 _ wonder if Jung saw the resonance of Nietzsche in Zarathustra - when we rebuke a hermit - might as well end him as he may never come down again - the idea that authentic voices in the status quo are denatured and thus rarer than rare? Isn't Synchronicity - seeing the connection, the meaning in unrelated events - schätzen to Nietzsche - perspectival- we divine meaning - we evaluate the value... Not intrinsic meaning outside our perspective? schätzen 1. (= veranschlagen) to estimate, to assess (auf +acc at); Wertgegenstand, Gemälde etc to value, to appraise; (= annehmen) to reckon, to think What is truth? > as William James and a friend agreed - truth is agreement. Pretty obviously influenced by Beyond good and evil? Not that truth does not exist - but to find truth we must be present and educated - be an individual actor - an agent rather than a camel - carrying traditions(peer pressure from dead people) to decide what is a valuable truth or not? As Jung said - "if what I held to be error guides me better than what I knew as truth: I will be guided by the error. "
@@christopherhamilton3621 You could read Jung say the same. In much of Jung's work he outlines the insights, and the dark places he was sent. Individuation as example, the Shadow.
I did not mean to insinuate it was the sole cause - The horrors of the great war also played a part. As Nietzsche said, and obviously influenced Jung: We are a complex of parts - that make up the whole - us. Gestalten.
… I think both men were great thinkers. I don’t think anyone can stand with Nietzsche as far as depth psychology and continental philosophy except Kirkegaard and Dostoyevsky. I would wager that both Nietzsche and Jung were at least honest in their own development of perspectives in trying to understand how this place works with all of the various variables that go into what a man is and what he can become. I do believe both had their own daemons running in the background (like computer scripts…not ironic that this is what they are really called in Information Technology )…because atheism and materialism were already dying it just took awhile for the stench to reach the populace. The only truly intellectually honest atheist is a nihilist and if that nihilist can pause his script for a second and look at the sheer impossibility of the evolutionary theory, the Big Bang, irreducible complexity, the Goldie locks phenomenon, Fibonacci sequence, fractals, etc…then he will quickly become some type of agnostic and be swept up by the Likes Of William James, Gnostics, Jung, etc…If that newly agnostic can keep going and trudge through that oneness modality mess and really start humbling themselves they may actually start beginning to understand and close in on the fact that there is a creator singular that is…now the task becomes who is the creator? I know Nietzsche and Jung’s own daemons, archetypes, etc…kept them running around trying to find out and figure out why reality seems to be able to provide both evidence for and against any particular view on almost any topic. This has become even more clear in the age of information. Nietzsche’s descent into madness was his will to order which became an actual possession! Jung it seems was able to stay a bit more fluid but just as deceived! Both of these men were deceived.
@@AjNotsri I also argue that Nietzsche died for this ideas... Or he had his own hell: that he cared for our lot, and when we ignored the hermit... They gave up the Geist and died...
Who's to say we as human beings are incapable of glancing, rarely, into the realm of creation? That our consciousness is born with this ability inherent, being created as a fractal part from a bigger, divine consciousness (ie. God). And once you had that rare glance, even being 98-99% sure of something... Wouldn't that qualify, then, as an actual knowing?
@@jahjahjagI don’t think it has to be rare. It’s inherent within being a product of nature. If you widen the gap of ego consciousness the clarity of inherent nature becomes increasingly vivid and it doesn’t go away with the presence of the ego either. It’s just the “thing that is”
@@globalamoeba8910 Rare, depending on what you'd view as such, no, it's just that the majority of people still are prefering to stay down in their egoic self almost as if they are actively avoiding it. When on the death bed, then IF at all, do they start opening up (again talking about the vast majority). "Thing that is" - the problem with "it" is that words cant really inherently give it a clear meaning that is to be understood rationally. Rather it has to be felt, experienced, to know it. Quite a divine conundrum, eh.
To be grounded but convinced lost to be found to only be eternally lost. That I fret is more accurate of Nietsche. Looked at insane to be found further lost.
42:04 ""...You can poke all sorts of logical holes in it, and accuse Jung of STATING things with certainty that are just speculation..."" Damn right I can; THAT is My view of him on all things.... I never liked Jung, his muddled mind and all the rest, passing as depth or underground thinking, his so called profundity is vomit, of all sorts of good nutritious foods that he could not stomach, like Nietzsche's clarity and truths. Jung's archetypes etc which seem to be infinitely divisible is just crank, an almost irresistible drug for the soft sciences and thus "therapists" love it, not so with Nietzsche. For Jung to say Nietzsche was NOT an atheist and thus suffered from it, and somehow led to his mental condition later, that is just pure.... I lack the words for what this is!! So he was an atheists that KNEW his god was dead?? Is a contradiction in terms!! Pure low level therapist, which next always proceed to explain, What I really mean by that is... so why not say THAT to begin with, and not the avalanche of bullsh!t your books are filled with. This is not against YOUUUUU the creator of this video, I know you are commenting and analysing what you got... just in case there is no confusion. This is my view of Jung not you.
"Mystical explanations are considered deep. The truth is that they are not even superficial" - Nietzsche foresaw Jung and those like him by a long shot
@@kevinbeck8836 Jung is like a scammer of dreams or word salads... I like this video's analysis of it, but to say is fair play with Nietzsche bc N. also made statements of fact is misleading I think, this a different in KIND and also DEGREE of it. But Jung's bs is what allows people like Jordan Peterson to go on for hours on iffy and vague bs that his mostly young audience cannot challenge. Good luck, glad you too can cal him out on it.
I agree with what you said. They are several things in Nietzsche philosophy that is a lot more convincing that Jung. Nietzsche isn’t a mystic by any means if we really read and analyze his books and connect them to scientific facts. There is also the fact that : -Nietzsche superior knowledge on history. -Nietzsche superior knowledge of words (philology) -Nietzsche proves with scientifical proof how an evaluation has occurred. -Perfect knowledge of Greek and Latin. Can understand French.
@@ggrthemostgodless8713There is also couple of grotesque errors in my opinion from Jung such as : Jesus is the archetype of individuation. How so ? Someone who wants to individuate wants to fight himself, masters his passion. These activities doesn’t exist within Jesus. His bodies already knows that he is in kingdom of heaven. He lives his life just as he will live in paradise. He doesn’t seek redemption nor does he have the goal. He lives in a perpetual bliss. How can one say Jesus is the archetype of individuation or hero buggles me.
Usually watch your videos to fall asleep, but I'm commenting now to say I love the Jung, Nietzsche, and philosophy content.
My favourite podcasts to fall asleep to
If I tried to use this podcast to fall asleep I'd have insomnia. It's way too engaging for me!
I also listen to this podcast to go to sleep! But this one, I realise I need to be awake in every way to listen to 🕊️
hahaha. I thought it was just me...
His voice is so soothing
I appreciate this podcast in so many ways. Your devotion to a single Philosopher with the wide-range and many angles you take to get at him stands out. Thoughtful, well-spoken, and not centered on you and your image make this a model for what UA-cam could be.
One significant factor contributing to Nietzsche's madness is the profound conflict between his ideals and his personal limitations. He championed a philosophy of unapologetic acceptance of life, yet he was an exceptionally sensitive individual. This sensitivity is evident in his writing at times. In "Ecce Homo," he extols the concept of *amor fati*-the love of fate-but in the same work, he also states that the only excuse for God is that He doesn’t exist, revealing a deep-seated resentment towards the world. This internal contradiction between his philosophical aspirations and personal disposition likely exacerbated his mental struggles.
A true INTJ
Me thinks his over thinking about his own egocentric nature drove him to madness.
Have you noticed how agitated people with mental illness appear.?The egos destructive nature is on display.
This is how the eastern philosophies counters the egos narcisstic awe of itself & is destroyed in deep meditation, which ironically enough stimulates the kundalini shakti=the jumping off place towards a higher introspection than the EGOS MACHINATIONS.
Only in SAMADHI can the ego be destroyed.But what is SAMADHI.?
Google search Ramana Maharshi-Be as you are Chapter 12 Experience and Samadhi...Sahaja samadhi-the unified field of awareness or Born Again when the ego is destroyed along with its subconscious mind-unconscious mind revealing the superconscious mind 24/7.Godspeed
@@redguy2489wonderful insight. Thank you. 💜
@redguy2489 His intellectual hubris gifted him 1 thing:A critical thinking mind,like Ram Dass aka Prof Richard Albert's use of LSD gifted him you are not your thinking mind.Enter his Guru in Sahaja Samadhi Neem Karoli Baba.
To understand Samadhi Google search Ramana Maharshi-Be as you are Chapter 12 Experience and Samadhi...Sahaja samadhi-the unified field of awareness or Born Again when the ego is destroyed along with its subconscious mind-unconscious mind revealing the superconscious mind 24/7.
@@redguy2489 Thank you for providing the dumbest soy boy comment on the internet this year.
Bro, your thumbnail is legendary.
Haha fr
Just dropped in to see if anyone said it
Holy fk i lold for a minute str8
Actually.
here we go boys, more of Jung and Nietzsche. You made my day
You are a love! !
“That, I thought, was his morbid misunderstanding: that he [Nietzsche] fearlessly and unsuspectingly let his No. 2 loose upon a world that knew and understood nothing about such things.” . . .
“And he fell-tightrope-walker that he proclaimed himself to be--into depths far beyond himself. He did not know his way about in this world and was like a man possessed, one who could be handled only with the utmost caution.” (C. G. Jung, Memories, Dreams, Reflections)
“When Zarathustra had thus spoken, one of the people called out: ‘We have now heard enough of the rope-dancer; it is time now for us to see him!’ And all the people laughed at Zarathustra. But the rope-dancer, who thought the words applied to him, began his performance.”
“Zarathustra, however, looked at the people and wondered. Then he spake thus:
Man is a rope stretched between the animal and the Superman-a rope over an abyss.” (Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra)
Extraordinary. The abyss
Your pfp is hilarious, no way you think you actually look like a woman 😅
There is a depth of mystery one need never stop exploring, when it comes to the territory these 2 men dove into, at their own risk : it's a topic I'll never grow tired of.
Multiple readings of Jung's Memories Dreams Reflections and Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil, and Thus Spake Zarathustra.
So much yet still to wander through.
Excellent work with this presentation!
Man. I'm fascinated by what I call " compensatory display" and it relationship to how our immune system works on the biological level. So often we meet people who are compensating for an inner frustration or attempting to work something out on a deep personal level, but much like those biological systems, we can take it to far , and end up cannibalizing ourselves. I believe jung was definitley wise to notice this lack of integration in nietchze,and so many of us. Great presentation as always.
Jung looks at Nietzsche how Nietzsche looks at Socrates
Nietzsche was anti Socratic
how’s that?
@@xonack read his critique of Socrates
close..but not exact enough........
2 fluffy cats in the bush is better than one short haired cat in the hand
I usually find it difficult to find good commentary on intellectual titans like Jung and Nietzschie because people speak about them as though they are super heroes, but listening to you makes me feel like both Jung and Nietzschie as just people.
Don't get me wrong, I still find both of them to be true sages, but now that I see them as more human figure, their knowledge feels more understandable now.
Thank you for the podcast, it was genuinely illuminating
I definitely noticed this in myself when I think about the ancient Greek philosophers, someone like Plato is like a mythical figure to me. At least I noticed it, but it's still not easy to be unbiased about their views.
… I think both men were great thinkers. I don’t think anyone can stand with Nietzsche as far as depth psychology and continental philosophy except Kirkegaard and Dostoyevsky. I would wager that both Nietzsche and Jung were at least honest in their own development of perspectives in trying to understand how this place works with all of the various variables that go into what a man is and what he can become. I do believe both had their own daemons running in the background (like computer scripts…not ironic that this is what they are really called in Information Technology )…because atheism and materialism were already dying it just took awhile for the stench to reach the populace. The only truly intellectually honest atheist is a nihilist and if that nihilist can pause his script for a second and look at the sheer impossibility of the evolutionary theory, the Big Bang, irreducible complexity, the Goldie locks phenomenon, Fibonacci sequence, fractals, etc…then he will quickly become some type of agnostic and be swept up by the Likes Of William James, Gnostics, Jung, etc…If that newly agnostic can keep going and trudge through that oneness modality mess and really start humbling themselves they may actually start beginning to understand and close in on the fact that there is a creator singular that is…now the task becomes who is the creator? I know Nietzsche and Jung’s own daemons, archetypes, etc…kept them running around trying to find out and figure out why reality seems to be able to provide both evidence for and against any particular view on almost any topic. This has become even more clear in the age of information. Nietzsche’s descent into madness was his will to order which became an actual possession! Jung it seems was able to stay a bit more fluid but just as deceived! Both of these men were deceived.
@@AjNotsri I think that the biggest barrier that keeps the vast majority of people who are trying to understand The One Creator is contending with the existence of tragedy and evil. "If God is all good, why does evil exist?" or "If the universe is truly neutral and devoid of meaning, why do objectively bad things exist?" etc... I like Jung and Nietzsche a lot and regarded them as superheroes because they gave me mental tools to approach this barrier. Nietzsche by questioning morality, which helped me remove it from its status as an absolute thing, and Jung with his research on the Self helped me understand that God didn't make a mistake by creating evil/tragedy and that Jesus and Satan are one and the same because Jesus, being an image of the Self, must include its evil side in order to be whole and perfect, which he has in Satan. Even this understanding by itself might be too much for those trying to understand The One, if they haven't gone through the transformation that you described. I don't imagine that someone who hasn't lost their adoration for conventional images and icons, just to later rediscover that same adoration after falling in love with the orderly chaos of Existence, could ever come to terms with a Oneness that allows Evil / Tragedy to exist... because that would require them to also accept their inate and enacted human evil. Something akin to crashing headfirst into Nihilism at 300 Km/H.
Plainly put JUNG and NIETZSCHE are all about BUDDHISM, yea?...................................................
@@bobvillanueva712 maybe. What connections have you found?
Hello hello thinkers. I would recommend to all of you the book "Nietzsche and Jung: The Whole Self in the Union of Opposites" by Lucy Huskinson. The book is derived from her doctoral thesis. What is important in this work is something similar to the content of this video - the similarities and differences in the thoughts of these two. Additionally, the book is an excellent review of all works by Nietzsche and all works by Jung through the prism of the "struggle" of opposites. The book also provides a good insight into the pre-Socratics, such as Heraclitus. There is a thread that connects these things and I think it leads very interestingly and intuitively to Bergson, Deleuze, and I will highlight Whitehead with his "philosophy (theology) of process". Finally, you should know: Support for this channel also from Serbia, I will try to spread the commendable work of this channel. Bravo!
As the internet becomes more isolated and crazy, I'm finally going to get back into reading books lol, and I think I'm gonna start with this one. This sounds right up my alley. Thanks
Thanks for this book suggestion, and greetings to you in Serbia. I visited your country 3 times last year and look forward to visiting again. прелепи Београд!
I'm very interested in Whitehead, so I appreciate your comment greatly.
… I think both men were great thinkers. I don’t think anyone can stand with Nietzsche as far as depth psychology and continental philosophy except Kirkegaard and Dostoyevsky. I would wager that both Nietzsche and Jung were at least honest in their own development of perspectives in trying to understand how this place works with all of the various variables that go into what a man is and what he can become. I do believe both had their own daemons running in the background (like computer scripts…not ironic that this is what they are really called in Information Technology )…because atheism and materialism were already dying it just took awhile for the stench to reach the populace. The only truly intellectually honest atheist is a nihilist and if that nihilist can pause his script for a second and look at the sheer impossibility of the evolutionary theory, the Big Bang, irreducible complexity, the Goldie locks phenomenon, Fibonacci sequence, fractals, etc…then he will quickly become some type of agnostic and be swept up by the Likes Of William James, Gnostics, Jung, etc…If that newly agnostic can keep going and trudge through that oneness modality mess and really start humbling themselves they may actually start beginning to understand and close in on the fact that there is a creator singular that is…now the task becomes who is the creator? I know Nietzsche and Jung’s own daemons, archetypes, etc…kept them running around trying to find out and figure out why reality seems to be able to provide both evidence for and against any particular view on almost any topic. This has become even more clear in the age of information. Nietzsche’s descent into madness was his will to order which became an actual possession! Jung it seems was able to stay a bit more fluid but just as deceived! Both of these men were deceived.
@@AjNotsri Your thinking is interesting, especially in light of the fact that I have recently been encountering texts (specifically an audiobook) by Justin Popović, a Serbian theologian and priest who was educated at Oxford and who dealt with the philosophical and theological analysis of characters from Dostoevsky's novels. I was actually surprised at how Dostoevsky had already posed all the possible questions that confront humanity through the dialogues of atheist - theist, moralist - immoralist characters. Your statement that an atheist can only be a nihilist is something that was also a natural conclusion in Dostoevsky, which St. Justin Popović pointed out. On the other hand, there are scientific facts that you mentioned which are difficult to refute or interpret (or perhaps they don't need to be interpreted), and they remain.
Lately it occurs to me that Neitzshe was one of the few philosophers who lived as he thought. His final years were famously spent in silence categorised by commentators as an mental illness of unknown aetiology. What if this was not pure "will" to explore the precipice and become anchorite. Oh and there it's now talked about in this post.
So he proved his philosophy is insane
56:44 I love measuring someone’s soul based on how much truth they can tolerate. After the last few years I appreciate and value so much more than before, someone’s ability to handle difficult truths about our reality. I never realized how few people can actually handle the truth whole truth. I figured it was maybe 40-50% of people that could be described that way. But after the pandemic and all of the other revelations, revelations about our governments and institutions, the way the world works, over the last decade I realize it’s more like 5-10% of the population that can actually stand the truth.
In light of the current political climate, the mind boggles at what you would characterize or define as 'the truth.' It seems evermore to mean whatever you choose it to be, regardless of how far it strays from someone/everyone else's truth. Good luck with trying to convince others of your interpretation of it. That is the basis of the individualistic, relativistic notion of 'truth.'
I agree with you. There is truth and there is reality. Neo Marxism strives to convince us otherwise. The idea is to create cognitive dissonance, confusion and demoralisation. In particular over identity. What people find most difficult is the depth and breadth of evil being perpetrated upon us.
100 years of psychological research into human behaviour is being employed to effect mind control and shape behaviour. This is mainly constant exposure and repetition of what they want you to accept. They use fear as motivation as people "herd" with the majority when threatened. They researched the medical field as being the most efficacious to induce this behaviour. They invested a lot of time in creating specialised "experts". The news readers held their positions over many decades to form a relationship with people.
The manipulation of the statistics and the use of modelling also comes from Psychology.
They discouraged critical thinking in education and stopped educating people and started training them instead. They projected larger numbers of compliance than actually existed so that people would cleave to the "majority".
Nothing was done that was not meticulously planned.
If you know and love our creator God then you can understand evil and protect yourself from it. Faith gives protection from fear. They know 15% of people cannot be hypnotised. That's why the censorship was so strong and unforgiving. They divide to conquer. God had to "die" to create the environment in society conducive to their plans. These plans are made hundreds of years in advance and carried through generationally. Technology has given them the means to
potential absolute control.
Evolution was introduced to undermine God. People want to be seen as "educated" and "intelligent". They get people to invest and implicate themselves and when they do it's so much harder to admit that you were fooled and partly culpable. They are occultists from the old Mystery Schools. They have been around for thousands of years but remained hidden. It helps if you have read the Bible but most people haven't. This is why they hate Christians. All of this is no surprise to us. They worship the adversary.
They are a sex and death cult. Murderers and liars.
I can relate. Dug deep into WW2, and who controls the media and ivy League institutions.
Sometimes it takes one’s madness to explain another’s existence and sanity.
But is denial, denial, and demolition your standard of truth and a standard for intellectual independence, like Nietzsche’s method, for example?
Goethe faulted Voltaire for his negative mentality and said that what he affirmed was no more valuable than what his old mother affirmed.
That is, the value of human beings is what it proves, not what it denies
Do not imagine the truth as a denial or contradiction to the majority, and consider it without criterion an indication of uniqueness and the power to bear the truth.
Nietzsche changed the direction of my life. I love the measured reason with which Jung brings clarity to Nietzsche's very emotional philosophy, that is so experiential an absorbing. Thank you for this. I was fortunate to have met one of Carl Jung s associates before he died. The reverence he held for Jung and the companionship of those that worked with him was something I will always remember.
Indeed you were fortunate!
Being 74 years old and my Grandmother was a Lutheran from Germany heritage while my Grandfather was Danish and he lived to the age of 91 . He would tell me stories about his childhood and his life until I was 23 years old. I have his old Double barrel 16 ga. Shotgun and his fly rod being made of split bamboo and the flys he made. Being the oldest of 7 children I feel so Blessed to have known all of my Grandparents and my brothers have asked me about them. My Grandparents on my Mothers side were German females and Irish and Danish on the Male side. I told German when I was in Junior High School . Thank you for giving me the opportunity to express myself. Personally I have become a Gnostic and follow The Book of Enoch, I only wish that my Grandfather could have seen these writings.
I think there's enough documentation about Nietzsche's physical illness driving him into ?insanity? to say Jung and many others unfairly judge his insanity as a pure insanity unaffected by illness. In truth I believe Freud and Jung were far more indebted to Nietzsche than they wanted to admit. He was a brilliant thinker with concepts that opened their eyes. I prefer to think of Nietzsche as Walter Kaufman did as deserving to be known as a great thinker.
Only sane comment. Was getting nauseous with all the Jung dickriders. I’ll be frank, Jung is having a moment because Peterson cant resist name dropping him. History had mostly forgotten about him and after Peterson goes Jung will go with him
The seminars on Zarathustra mentioned here went on for May years and the book is about 1400 pages, so you can't reasonably doubt that Jung considered him very important
In these seminars Jung states explicitly that he thinks the effort of writing Zarathustra was what caused Nietzsches breakdown
@@xmathmanx this is what Jung said. Because the inflation of the archetype. Let’s think about it. Are more “archetypal inflation” in Jung’s writings?
@@lotharlamurtra7924 yes, of course, it was a main theme of Jungs
super ultra dope thumbnail.
The same photo on the front of a book by him..my pal put a sauve ket moustache on him and still has the screensaver 20yrs later ...it's slowly becoming an archetype
Wicked mega dope comment ❤
Thanks for looking at this from all sides. I was fortunate to have Dr. Marion Woodamn as a high school English Teacher for five years. In my graduate year, she left teaching to attend the Jungian Institute in Switzerland. Later, she became an international icon in Jungian Psychology, an analyst, and the author of five books.
I was raised a Christian, so I understood well the opposite views of Philosophy and Psychology. She would talk about them from time to time. Certainly, when entering university, I was way ahead of the game due to her teaching, which most had no clue about.
I actually entered therapy, and the Dr said I was obsessed with the mind. Much due to it was the waters I was raised in.
I always emphasized that one, when reading Nietzsche, should first read the great works he challenges or inverted as his personification of the antichrist that came before him. I want you to know that you are well presenting the philosophers who influenced Nietzsche. IT IS IMPORTANT! Many read Nietzsche as a comic book hero and hang on his every word rather than critically sorting it through to see the underlying works he changed from its religious and philosophical form into psychology.
Many use the term inflated in everyday language, though in its proper context, as you refer to Jungs analytical view as a persona identification with an archetype. Nietzsche's persona identifies with the saviour complex (Christ) and wisdom ( Sophocles), wanting to cause a paradigm shift by knocking the pillars down rather than as a bridge. He, in fact, horrified the reader through his violent obsession. Jung has the psychologist tempter to absorb and listen before analyzing what he is trying to say.
Your wording as a skit of the story of Abraham is biased toward Nietzsche; you have God telling the man to kill his child. Though he left out the angel's voice ( as in the Bible), it became his enlightened consciousness, raising him from the unconscious to consciousness. In psychological terms, ego awareness is where he chooses not to, as in Jung's psychology. Nietzsche would have no part of consciousness.
Thanks again.
Love this
This is my favorite lecture this far. Long time listener. And I find jung's perspective potent and fascinating
This is a perfect lecture as a pre-requisite to actually reading Zarathustra. Well done thank you for this information!
Fabulous program.I am so deep into this program. The day after Orthodox Easter Pascha.
The Church is darkened at Midnight and a one holy flame ignites all the candles and the members walk by in procession circular-everyone must leave the Church and the Priest is the one last out. On returning, he bangs the wooden cross loudly 3x on the door and shouts Open the Door! The members follow him back to the transformed Church.
I also greatly enjoy the expansion beyond Nietzsche but appreciate your desire to keep the podcast centered on him. I found these two episodes on Jung very valuable and essential to better understand Nietzsche. Thank you!
Would be so on board with as much Jung related work as you want to put out.
I clicked the video because of the funny thumbnail. Made me chuckle, well done!
Thank you very much for delving into, I do not have the time nor the will to sit down and read these books but am very interested in them. I find it hard to understand them sometimes. You have helped my understanding of philosophy 10 fold, thank you again.
Hear hear
Yeah, as someone with ADHD, I get too distracted to sit down in a quiet room and read a book. I can't stay still, I hate doing things in a linear fashion, I have to be exploring, creating and thinking my own thoughts, and these podcasts help me to process this information in a characteristically less strict, less linear fashion.
Thank you, as always, thoroughly engaging and informative.
So happy the algorithm gifted me this. Even happier when I saw the quality of the comments. I will both listen to and read all. What a beautiful community I stumbled into.
Looking forward to your future content. I'm excited for the broader topics you mentioned at the end of this video.
This is why studying the ancient myths is so fascinating. These people were in touch with fundamental truths expressed in a way they could understand.
I take a deep bow. This lecture was true profound youtube gold. Stay away from the trappings, in ALL aspects of life… ☯️😮💨
Brilliant!! That was Awesome! Will listen to several times. And share, of course.
I’ve only read Jung’s Man and His Symbols. I’ve listened to many talks like this about his life’s work and my inevitable deep dive into the rest of his work is essential and over due. Talks like this rekindle my excitement for knowledge I’ve yet to receive. My interest has been focused on Hegel for the last few months and I’ve been avoiding studying these two thinkers alongside each other, but after this episode I think I will.
All that falls, rises; all that is lost finds its way back; all that is forgotten is remembered again.
I think what Jung was looking for was the word "syphilis."
Brilliant!
that is the common understanding. but it is contested more and more.
Gotta gave sex to get syphilis.
No, it's always been a poor bs explanation about Nietzsches condition.
@@KimmobigpenNurmi poor as in "not entertaining enough"?
This was excellent!
That thumbnail and title is hilarious 😂😆😂
I was listening to a completely unrelated video while decorating my new apartment and when it ended your video (quite thankfully) was next on autoplay. Having had a philosophical mind since my young teens I'm always interested in and in search of channels like yours. I'm tremendously grateful for having been newly introduced to your channel.
With love and appreciation from a new subscriber who's excited to listen to more of your older and all of your new to come videos.
what an excellent lecture. how do i find more of your work.
Subscribe to the channel! 🙏
This was so well done. Thank you.
"Mystical explanations are considered deep. The truth is that they are not even superficial"
- Nietzsche foresaw Jung and those like him by a long shot
I agree.
Jung is right about Nietzsche. Nietzsche is right about Jung.
Their criticisms are not mutually exclusive.
@@Laotzu.Goldbugexactly both understand and disagree with eachother whilst being right and wrong in different bits of their holistic views on the world, in my opinion. I think the right way to analyse them is to understand what they get right from them and why they were also wrong in other ways.
We must not forget that Nietzsche was influenced by Darwin and the materialists of the 19th century.
@@HiperStyle Indeed. Conversely I think there is no darwinism in Jung’s mind. Nevertheless Evolutionary Psychology in one side and Collective Inconscious and Archetypes in the other, have much in common. Jungians and Evolutionary Psychologist should think and work together!
The thumbnail brings me joy
Best channel on YT! Thanks so much for the great content!
41:55 Your summarized opinions at this timestamp, are spot on imo, well done. Jung was probably in some sense, too much of a speculative mystic, and Nietzsche, probably too much of a disagreeable cynic. Nevertheless, there have hardly been two, more brilliant individuals in the past few centuries, and any thoughtfully derived 'synthesis' of their work is guaranteed to be fruitful.
No need for synthesis. It is diversity. They dont need to reconsile..
Poor Nietsche. His dad died at 35 of an 'agonizing' brain disease, which Fredrich feared he had inherited. After years of bad health, he collapsed and descended into dementia and paralysis. Imagine having that hanging over you all your life.
18:05 I do a lot of yelling myself! It's only because I'm still at the early stages of figuring out how to talk about what I've been learning! Because the way I learned it isn't necessarily the way everyone else will/can learn it!
Thank you for this wonderful essay analysis! Very, very insightful and brings context to what Jung actually disagreed with for Nietzsche.
Really great talk. This is the first video I've watched of yours and you seem to have a way of presenting ideas fluidly, embedded within a greater narrative that makes the talk easily comprehensible
This was excellent thank you. You rarely find content that is of this high quality. I will definitely be supporting your patreon.
Thank you!
Carl Jung has saved the psyche of humanity.
thank god will have superman trump to the rescue. :D
Carl Jung saved my psyche, and my life when I wanted to end it
Carl Jung saved my psyche, and my life when I wanted to end it
True
@@antoineduchamp4931🤯 wow happened to me as well. When I found Jung I came to the conclusion that that was the way how god's were created by the human mind. And Jung help us a lot on how to deal with our self and also connect us with the divine.
Thank you for your work among Jung and Nietzsche..
Damn dude you just got yourself a subscription..you did an excellent job of breaking all this down. I was able to follow you all the way threw with out losing any focus and or interest. Keep sharing/making content 🤙🏼
I like the way you take me with you to your new found compartments of the boat , where one realises that life is but a drean and all one to do is to keep rowing. These men, you included may be the wood work that makes the strong boat that takes anyone that finds themselves on board.
Thank you for pronouncing Nietzsche properly
Bravo. Masterful overview
At 38:38, you use the phrase "Terror Management Theory" in speaking of the notions of Freud. Since the 1980s this phrase was adopted to refer to the work of 3 experimental social psychologists who set out to test the theories of cultural anthropologist Ernest Becker. Upon hearing the phrase here, I couldn't help wondering if Freud actually used it, and also whether you have heard of the TMT studies I refer to; one of the psychologists, Sheldon Solomon, is a friend of mine. The Ernest Becker Foundation dissolved last year and many members would not discuss the work of Jung with me, they tending towards rigid secular materialism. Delighted you are using him in your interpretations here as I believe Jung's ideas will finally have to be considered in any comprehensive survey of the psychological nature of Humankind.
As a musician...I must confess...your sharp mind is equally matched by the cadence of your voice.
interesting way of putting it.
After all these listenings, I just realized that Jung only needs the idea of god for his idea to be true. Sometimes we listen so intently for one idea, we miss the obvious.
You have isolated just the portions of writing I wasn't sure I was looking for. Carl junior especially was so prolific that once you find a particular point of interest it's hard to sort through the whole corpus of work four other mentions related to that same subject. Thanks because my own efforts of study are impaired by disability illness and such I often find myself caught up and study for hours but with work so vast hard to tell if I've gotten anywhere on any particular idea. Then mentally and physically exhausted with what feels like not much to show. Always rather I have been impatient and lacking in concentration so this obviously helps focus
Really nice selection of commentary on Nietzche’s writings.
Tremendous episode!!! Truly spectacular!!!! Do you do group or private philosophy teachings?
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."
This is what came to mind listening to this, and I really couldn't help feeling that the Nietzschean abyss Jung stared into stared disturbingly back at him with a mocking refrain of, "Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones." What do I mean by this? Well, I believe Jung's charge of insanity against Nietzsche, his accusation of archetypal inflation this is could just as easily be hurled back in Jung's own face. For didn't Jung himself admit to an act of mediumship when receiving his Seven Sermons To the Dead?
Perhaps we can even take this further and make the claim that Jung's Seven Sermons To the Dead was just his attempt to try and reach the same heights/depths of insight that Nietzsche achieved in his Zarathustra? That Jung's sermonizing Basilides was just a copycat Zarathustra, and that his "dead" were just the Last Men that Nietzsche/Zarathustra had prophecized against years earlier? Yes. I really can't escape the feeling that Jung, by hurling accusations of insanity at Nietzsche's literary ghost, wasn't perhaps trying to deflect inquisitive readers from perhaps drawing certain conclusions of their own regarding Jung's influential "proximity" to Zarathustra.
Yes. I do believe that Jung doth protest a little too much in this regard.
One thing overlooked in Neitzsche's writings is his excellent sense of humour.Many times after he rounded off an aphorism with a witty expression I would vurst out laughing.like many men of an intellectual nature I imagine Neitzsche to have been a man of a lusty temperament and a powerful libido and he may well have found a release in brothels .
The problem with Jung is that he attributes shared mythologies to inner psychic truths when they are more realistically attributable to shared ancestry or from spread.
For example, while it's true that we see dogs associated with death among native American tribes and European peoples, it is also true that both of these groups descended from a common ancestor, the Ancient North Eurasians, which others, like say the Austronesians or Africans did not. So it is likely that this was a mythical invention of the ANE peoples, and it has survived in one form or another among their descendants.
Or the Chaoskampf. Whether it started as a Proto Indo European Myth or a proto semitic myth, it spread from these not too distant regions and their descendants, giving rise to Zeus vs Typhon, Marduk vs Tiamat, Thor vs the World Serpent, etc, just as the chariot spread from the Indo Aryans to the rest of the Bronze Age world.
People interact, and spread religious ideas. Aphrodite came from the Phoenicians, who in turn got her from Ishtar.
Zeus, Tyr, Jove, Tiwaz, and hte other sky fathers of Indo European myth aren't manifestations of some ancient Archetype, but descendants of the same ancient Indo European god.
Comparative Mythology has discredited Jung, in my opinion.
Jung owns. Great episode.
Haven't listened yet, but a "like" just for the thumbnail! 😂
I believe this is one of your better videos
Amazing content, thank you
Really great dialogue on these thoughts.
Nietzsche was a key to my juvenile insight, and absolutely influenced my philosophy. As I've aged, though, I've gravitated to Jung's thought. I think Jung's effort is also universally valuable, where Nietzsche's is niche. Both undoubtedly have their place.
All that said... I wonder what Nietzsche's output would have been had he married the woman of his fancy.
Keep going.
All his life, Jung was frightened that he would become mad, like Nietzsche. And he did, after his breakup with Freud. Unlike Nietzsche he recovered and used his experience of psychosis constructively. This fear, however, and posthumous rivalry, robbed him of compassion for Nietzsche.
Why should anybody have compassion for Nietzsche, him, who despised compassion above all?
@@alena-qu9vj tell me you know nothing about Nietzche without telling me you know nothing about Nietzche.
@@De_Selby At least I know how to spell Nietzsche properly 😅
Sadly, some of these comments are made not by persons who know Nietzsche’s writings and biography well, but desperately want to appear important. NB Nietzsche despised pity which is rather different from compassion. His correspondence reveals that he had too much of compassion, and his ‘mask of hardness’ was a defence against it. In effect, a defence against himself.
@@emmabovary9374 Original "Mitleid" definitely translates "compassion" and aparently google is full of experts who just want to appear important:
..."Nietzsche is known for his penetrating critique of Mitleid (now commonly rendered as “compassion”). He seems to be critical of all compassion but at times also seems to praise a different form of compassion, which he refers to as “our compassion” and contrasts it with “your compassion” (BGE 225). Some commentators have interpreted this to mean that Nietzsche’s criticism is not as unconditional as it may seem - that he does not condemn compassion entirely. I disagree and contend that even though Nietzsche appears to speak favorably of some forms of compassion, he regards the nature of all compassion to be fundamentally bad. Furthermore, I suggest that Nietzsche’s discussion on different forms of compassion have significant implications for achieving greatness and meaning in life. More specifically, I argue that, for Nietzsche, “our compassion,” however regrettable qua compassion it is, may give occasion for a rare and peculiar insight into “co-suffering” with others, which in turn results in overcoming compassion entirely. I also argue that although Nietzsche objects to compassion, he approves of a form of what feminist theorists might now call “anticipatory empathy.” Even though a large body of literature has evolved over Nietzsche’s critical evaluation of compassion, his understanding of a non-compassionate response to suffering is, in my view, rather overlooked and should receive more attention. abstract from "Nietzsche’s Compassion Vasfi O. Özen"
being jutst one of the many expert opinions.
But if you think your opinion is the only holy truth just enjoy.
Perfect timing, I'm about to take a walk to so I can listen to this at the same time, btw your last Jung video was excellent!
59:55 Exactly! It's so refreshing to see someone with the same view.
I haven't read the seminar about Nietzche but taking into account Jung's diagnosis of Joyce's daughter, Lucia, I wonder if Jung considered something similar thinking about Nietzche: “Doctor Jung, have you noticed that my daughter seems to be submerged in the same waters as me?” to which he answered: “Yes, but where you swim, she drowns.”
This thumbnail is pure gold i laughed so hard and had to watch, great video too ofc.❤
Nietzsche was impressive for the exact reason that he created a work that transcended the limitations of the philosopher, unlike other philosophers who limited themselves to the barriers of their own reason, Nietzsche perceived the void of the "death of god" and really went to the end and transcended himself , his life apparently going on a different path from his philosophy itself shows that even though he suffered from Cadasil due to his father's genetics, with intense intellectual activity he prolonged his life span and managed to overcome his living conditions within the scope of his work, thanks for the Deleuze's quote btw.
"Stuck in bed... Deep Crisis.... I despise Life." -Nietzche's diary
@@Dunge0n Yep, This kind of thing his life is full of and he managed to channel the opposite in his philosophical work, different from Schopenhauer, that some would even say had a better life
@@nebula_Mage It's really just simple stubbornness, in my opinion. A bit more verbose and erudite than people are used to, but still. I often think Nietzche would have rather simply "lost his mind" through intense exercise than words, if his health wasn't so cursed.
Instead he had to 'convince' himself to go on, like so many do, with self-penned gospels of 'hope': denying death.
@@nebula_Mage Honestly I don't find much admirable about life or how he, or anyone, decides to 'tame' it. Nobody ever succeeded. I've never liked negotiating with the dragon that's gonna eat me in the end. There really isn't an end to the anti-human horror I'd authorize, if it somehow made me immortal.
@@Dunge0n agree 100%, I'm not really talking about him, about his life, how he lived, I'm not admiring a person but rather how exactly his work ends up being impersonal and much bigger than him, as if he had really surrendered to a random impersonal unconscious aspect, it has elements who are similar to him but there are so many things so far from who he was that it really seems like something of collective unconsciousness, or just some reverberating atavism even
The thing is that psychoanalysts are the most aphysical people around, Nietsche at least was propelled by chronical headaches, which is unlike emotions a highly physical experience.
“Well it’s not merely…” YES! YES IT IS MERELY!
Fascinating episode that addressed some of the concerns I've puzzled over re Nietzsche's philosophy, albeit raising new questions.
This is so good! This is an example of the information revolution's profound side.
Can I ask you to please never start using AI for narration? AI has its place, but please inform us if you do choose to use it. Its getting harder and harder to discern. But it matters. On some level it affects us, even when we cant consciously catch it. We need human voices talking to us now.
Thank you and thanks to everyone else that keeps engaging and expanding my mind. In stead of numbing it with bite sized and harmful dopamine hits. Big fan
7:28 People know Marx said, "Religion is the opiate of the people," but not that he says two paragraphs later, "The criticism of religion disillusions man, so that he will think, act, and fashion his reality like a man who has discarded his illusions and regained his senses, so that he will move around himself as his own true Sun. Religion is only the illusory Sun which revolves around man as long as he does not revolve around himself." - Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right
Marx wanted man's ego to be 'lord of the universe' as stated here.
Marx was also obsessed with Mephistopheles in Faust, who you mentioned was a trickster figure in the archetype video; Marx's favourite quote of Mephistopheles being, "Everything that exists deserves to perish."
I'm not religious, but it's just fascinating to see this.
Marx, like Nietzsche, was a bitter schizo.
My father once told me that madness, depression and despair justify itself. Describing it makes you emphatize with it, thus descend into it. The real answer to despair is emptiness that lies beneath
Emptiness of what sort
Lost in translation, lacking context, or meaningless gibberish
@regimentsystem3306 I interpret this as:
If you try to rationalise/make sense of your disorders, you'd trick yourself into normalising it. You then wouldn't try to pull yourself away from it due to "Well, logically, this is what should happen. So I'll let it happen". The only way you could solve the problem is (now this is the part I'm confused about)
- recognising that rationalising without improvements is futile (can't just sit there and think)
OR
- recognise the dire aspect and push into action first and foremost (do now, think later)
If this is what he truly meant, I don't particularly agree
@@MANFAQYOU as someone who has had severe mental problems from childhood trauma and cured all of them over the course if 10 years without the help of spineless professionals, this is all a bunch of rubbish to me. Srep one is knoe thyself, Step two is to know the enemy/issue, understand why it is here and how it is sustained, understand the mechanisms and weak spots. Step three is Cut off its supply lines, strike surgically and put something positive into the hole where the enemy once dwelled. Mental health is war, so nothing can be achieved without good reconnaissance, intelligence, and the intention to win. Displace the enemy, settle his territory, or help allies settle in the enemies territory. Conquest.
@@MANFAQYOU Excuse me if I confused you all. I generally like to pick up high end statements and questions, because it makes me think.
I spent 2 years depressed and constantly ruminating about emptiness, and all the bad gibberish in my life, until I realized that my lifestyle and thoughts justified the depression. I was finally able to see depression being something other than myself, like a tiny layer of ungratefulness resting ontop of my head and colliding my thoughts against each other into a black hole of self loathing. I realized then (few years ago) that depression is not a sickness but a trap
Appreciation.
And Nietzsche was the cause for Jung's own break with reality, maybe even multiple times. He even feared he may have had schizophrenia(funny how it means a split mind/consciousness/personality) as a result of the deep thinking about meaning and purpose he found within the philosophy of Fred...
5:00 I would push back and point out that the quote about religion was one of a religious view to life, one not unlike Fred - In that gott ist tot because we no longer believe. I will put the Jung quote below.
Among all my patients in the second half of life-that is to say, over thirty-five-there has not been one whose problem in the last resort was not that of finding a religious outlook on life. It is safe to say that every one of them fell ill because he had lost what the living religions of every age have given their followers, and none of them has been really healed who did not regain his religious outlook.
As Jung and Campbell would point out: Tat Tvam Asi - We are as God - and it is the self and the sacred within that we are missing, or overlooking - A phronesis is required - not a major shift - An awakening to the truth we used to know but forgot - Anumana in Sanskrit...
14:45 _ wonder if Jung saw the resonance of Nietzsche in Zarathustra - when we rebuke a hermit - might as well end him as he may never come down again - the idea that authentic voices in the status quo are denatured and thus rarer than rare?
Isn't Synchronicity - seeing the connection, the meaning in unrelated events - schätzen to Nietzsche - perspectival- we divine meaning - we evaluate the value... Not intrinsic meaning outside our perspective?
schätzen
1. (= veranschlagen) to estimate, to assess (auf +acc at); Wertgegenstand, Gemälde etc to value, to appraise; (= annehmen) to reckon, to think
What is truth? > as William James and a friend agreed - truth is agreement. Pretty obviously influenced by Beyond good and evil? Not that truth does not exist - but to find truth we must be present and educated - be an individual actor - an agent rather than a camel - carrying traditions(peer pressure from dead people) to decide what is a valuable truth or not? As Jung said - "if what I held to be error guides me better than what I knew as truth: I will be guided by the error. "
Nietzsche the cause of Jungs break? You wanna explain that? 😂
@@christopherhamilton3621 You could read Jung say the same. In much of Jung's work he outlines the insights, and the dark places he was sent. Individuation as example, the Shadow.
I did not mean to insinuate it was the sole cause - The horrors of the great war also played a part. As Nietzsche said, and obviously influenced Jung: We are a complex of parts - that make up the whole - us. Gestalten.
… I think both men were great thinkers. I don’t think anyone can stand with Nietzsche as far as depth psychology and continental philosophy except Kirkegaard and Dostoyevsky. I would wager that both Nietzsche and Jung were at least honest in their own development of perspectives in trying to understand how this place works with all of the various variables that go into what a man is and what he can become. I do believe both had their own daemons running in the background (like computer scripts…not ironic that this is what they are really called in Information Technology )…because atheism and materialism were already dying it just took awhile for the stench to reach the populace. The only truly intellectually honest atheist is a nihilist and if that nihilist can pause his script for a second and look at the sheer impossibility of the evolutionary theory, the Big Bang, irreducible complexity, the Goldie locks phenomenon, Fibonacci sequence, fractals, etc…then he will quickly become some type of agnostic and be swept up by the Likes Of William James, Gnostics, Jung, etc…If that newly agnostic can keep going and trudge through that oneness modality mess and really start humbling themselves they may actually start beginning to understand and close in on the fact that there is a creator singular that is…now the task becomes who is the creator? I know Nietzsche and Jung’s own daemons, archetypes, etc…kept them running around trying to find out and figure out why reality seems to be able to provide both evidence for and against any particular view on almost any topic. This has become even more clear in the age of information. Nietzsche’s descent into madness was his will to order which became an actual possession! Jung it seems was able to stay a bit more fluid but just as deceived! Both of these men were deceived.
@@AjNotsri I also argue that Nietzsche died for this ideas... Or he had his own hell: that he cared for our lot, and when we ignored the hermit... They gave up the Geist and died...
Ah I needed this
And in Walpurgis Night as well, great content.
a reply is directly below -- from a WALPURGIS/GOETHE/MENDELSSOHN FAN
Excellent presents, many thanks. I think Jung had a much deeper, broader, all inclusive and thus kinder thought proces than Nietzsche or Freud.
Rewatching this one. I love your videos on Jung!
Do you plan on making a video about Hume or Wittgenstein at some point?
This is your best video to date. Going to watch this again.
Great lecture as always!!! Which ever direction you take the podcast I’m sure it’ll be extremely interesting.
Jung said... He doesn't believe in God, He knows... Extremely compelling.
Who's to say we as human beings are incapable of glancing, rarely, into the realm of creation?
That our consciousness is born with this ability inherent, being created as a fractal part from a bigger, divine consciousness (ie. God).
And once you had that rare glance, even being 98-99% sure of something... Wouldn't that qualify, then, as an actual knowing?
@@jahjahjagI don’t think it has to be rare. It’s inherent within being a product of nature. If you widen the gap of ego consciousness the clarity of inherent nature becomes increasingly vivid and it doesn’t go away with the presence of the ego either. It’s just the “thing that is”
@@globalamoeba8910 Rare, depending on what you'd view as such, no, it's just that the majority of people still are prefering to stay down in their egoic self almost as if they are actively avoiding it. When on the death bed, then IF at all, do they start opening up (again talking about the vast majority).
"Thing that is" - the problem with "it" is that words cant really inherently give it a clear meaning that is to be understood rationally. Rather it has to be felt, experienced, to know it. Quite a divine conundrum, eh.
At a certain point one has to discover that true self knowledge does not come from the mind.
… The nous?
Does it come from the Yuan Shen, from the Olympis, from the beginning of the Universe?
It comes from the spinal cord. The process is Kundalini practices.
Lol oh nvm demonic crap
Yes, the mind can not overcome the ego.
Thank you very much. Very important and insightful analysis.
To be grounded but convinced lost to be found to only be eternally lost. That I fret is more accurate of Nietsche. Looked at insane to be found further lost.
Brilliant thumbnail, genuinely made me laugh
great work , fresh important contexts
Thank you for the great video! Love this channel!
Excellent episode! Thank you
A very interesting discussion. Thank you for your videos and content
Very lovely explaination and tone.
42:04
""...You can poke all sorts of logical holes in it, and accuse Jung of STATING things with certainty that are just speculation...""
Damn right I can; THAT is My view of him on all things....
I never liked Jung, his muddled mind and all the rest, passing as depth or underground thinking, his so called profundity is vomit, of all sorts of good nutritious foods that he could not stomach, like Nietzsche's clarity and truths.
Jung's archetypes etc which seem to be infinitely divisible is just crank, an almost irresistible drug for the soft sciences and thus "therapists" love it, not so with Nietzsche.
For Jung to say Nietzsche was NOT an atheist and thus suffered from it, and somehow led to his mental condition later, that is just pure.... I lack the words for what this is!! So he was an atheists that KNEW his god was dead?? Is a contradiction in terms!! Pure low level therapist, which next always proceed to explain, What I really mean by that is... so why not say THAT to begin with, and not the avalanche of bullsh!t your books are filled with.
This is not against YOUUUUU the creator of this video, I know you are commenting and analysing what you got... just in case there is no confusion. This is my view of Jung not you.
Glad to see I’m not the only one nauseated by Jung
"Mystical explanations are considered deep. The truth is that they are not even superficial"
- Nietzsche foresaw Jung and those like him by a long shot
@@kevinbeck8836
Jung is like a scammer of dreams or word salads...
I like this video's analysis of it, but to say is fair play with Nietzsche bc N. also made statements of fact is misleading I think, this a different in KIND and also DEGREE of it.
But Jung's bs is what allows people like Jordan Peterson to go on for hours on iffy and vague bs that his mostly young audience cannot challenge.
Good luck, glad you too can cal him out on it.
I agree with what you said. They are several things in Nietzsche philosophy that is a lot more convincing that Jung. Nietzsche isn’t a mystic by any means if we really read and analyze his books and connect them to scientific facts. There is also the fact that :
-Nietzsche superior knowledge on history.
-Nietzsche superior knowledge of words (philology)
-Nietzsche proves with scientifical proof how an evaluation has occurred.
-Perfect knowledge of Greek and Latin. Can understand French.
@@ggrthemostgodless8713There is also couple of grotesque errors in my opinion from Jung such as : Jesus is the archetype of individuation. How so ? Someone who wants to individuate wants to fight himself, masters his passion.
These activities doesn’t exist within Jesus. His bodies already knows that he is in kingdom of heaven. He lives his life just as he will live in paradise. He doesn’t seek redemption nor does he have the goal. He lives in a perpetual bliss. How can one say Jesus is the archetype of individuation or hero buggles me.