I think this is the most important part of the programme: 'This empirical picture of religion, in which God is an enlarged father, is indeed not only not the essence, but actually the contrary of what the great humanistic, monotheistic religions teach. 'What did they teach? They taught in the first place that God is unknowable, that you must not use God's name in Vain, that you must not make a picture of God. That God is not a thing, and God is not a person; but God is a word for that which we do not understand, and yet which is the aim of all our striving... '...God represented the idea of truth and of love, and that man's religious task in the world was not simply to believe in such an idea, but to take it seriously; to have it as his ultimate concern, and to live his life in such a way that to develop his capacity for love and to develop his capacity for reason are the main aims to which his whole life are devoted.' (Erich Fromm).
It's a shame he believes in such nonsense. Religion seems to be Fromms one intellectual weakness. Constantly referencing religious thinkers. And at the time claiming there is some truth to be found in a lie.
He is a productive atheist but religious people & atheists can be close friends these days this is because we underestimate cognitive models & the effects/affects of perception. This is because of the evolution of decision theory which helps us estimate what a pre-atavistic pre-hedonic model would be like & it could very well be like Navier Stokes or a fluid computer display for fluid mechanics. Fromm himself says "man this & man that" so he is contradicting himself 100% but he is not doing this intentionally -- (thereby altering the model & its surface & internal awareness & degrees of freedom in regards to matter & anti-matter symmetry & asymmetry) it is just the future is outside of his cognitive model. You have to travel so far into the future to predict the past, so that means that not only is no information lost (or deleted & info has also never been encrypted, & dont trust anyone who tells you you can drink from a tank of water with a drop of cynanide in it & more matter anti-matter 'fallibility' paradoxes) but that equilibrium bootstraps the previous world line into type of immunity or retrocausal origins theory so that chaos can reveal a false order & the work of 'eternity' & spacetime can continue. Immune systems are defense systems but you have to recognize the model/s if you don't, lack of mutualism means you do not exist & you never existed, so it is really important to remember everything exists (Lisa Randall: Did Dark Matter Kill the Dinosaurs), just because we don't know what any specific thing is does mean it doesn't exist, it doesn't mean you cannot find out & also find out with others, you don't want to portray what exists conflating it with what exists because then you created another cognitive paradox that has no model or past future metric (nothing in the quantum world is real unless you are 'looking at it' &: see Babichenkos communication complexity: "Nash equilibrium might take longer than the age of the universe." ) We are like Helen Keller. Nothing is deleted you have to travel so far into the future that you predict the past this is why world lines travel backwards in time such as the arrow of time we all share as objects with free will in free space as varying matter anti matter paradoxes.. "
So, this is between the will of God and the God of need. The will of God is the father, the real God, and the God in need is mother, the human creation, the unreal that has completely shrouded the real God, in so much that now in some religions such as Hinduism and catholicism there is only the mother.
I have definitely heard some religious overtones in Fromm speeches. He references many religious thinkers. I think this may be his one fault in his worldview.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Great thinker, precious video…
It is a pleasure to listen to such erudite and polite gentlemen. Thank you for uploading!
Londonfogey back then people of knowledge used to behave like this
Erudition and politeness without substance is intellectual masturbation.
Sehr wertvolles Video...Danke
Its s wonderful to see such great intrest in one of the greatest minds in history.)
Fromm is the real Humanist. Respect
Indeed! And although he was an atheist he provided nonetheless one, if not the best, explanations of faith.
@@veritasetlibertas7889 Very true.
Brilliant! :)
I think this is the most important part of the programme:
'This empirical picture of religion, in which God is an enlarged father, is indeed not only not the essence, but actually the contrary of what the great humanistic, monotheistic religions teach.
'What did they teach? They taught in the first place that God is unknowable, that you must not use God's name in Vain, that you must not make a picture of God. That God is not a thing, and God is not a person; but God is a word for that which we do not understand, and yet which is the aim of all our striving...
'...God represented the idea of truth and of love, and that man's religious task in the world was not simply to believe in such an idea, but to take it seriously; to have it as his ultimate concern, and to live his life in such a way that to develop his capacity for love and to develop his capacity for reason are the main aims to which his whole life are devoted.' (Erich Fromm).
It's a shame he believes in such nonsense. Religion seems to be Fromms one intellectual weakness. Constantly referencing religious thinkers. And at the time claiming there is some truth to be found in a lie.
He is a productive atheist but religious people & atheists can be close friends these days this is because we underestimate cognitive models & the effects/affects of perception.
This is because of the evolution of decision theory which helps us estimate what a pre-atavistic pre-hedonic model would be like & it could very well be like Navier Stokes or a fluid computer display for fluid mechanics.
Fromm himself says "man this & man that" so he is contradicting himself 100% but he is not doing this intentionally -- (thereby altering the model & its surface & internal awareness & degrees of freedom in regards to matter & anti-matter symmetry & asymmetry) it is just the future is outside of his cognitive model.
You have to travel so far into the future to predict the past, so that means that not only is no information lost (or deleted & info has also never been encrypted, & dont trust anyone who tells you you can drink from a tank of water with a drop of cynanide in it & more matter anti-matter 'fallibility' paradoxes) but that equilibrium bootstraps the previous world line into type of immunity or retrocausal origins theory so that chaos can reveal a false order & the work of 'eternity' & spacetime can continue.
Immune systems are defense systems but you have to recognize the model/s if you don't, lack of mutualism means you do not exist & you never existed, so it is really important to remember everything exists (Lisa Randall: Did Dark Matter Kill the Dinosaurs), just because we don't know what any specific thing is does mean it doesn't exist, it doesn't mean you cannot find out & also find out with others, you don't want to portray what exists conflating it with what exists because then you created another cognitive paradox that has no model or past future metric (nothing in the quantum world is real unless you are 'looking at it' &: see Babichenkos communication complexity: "Nash equilibrium might take longer than the age of the universe." ) We are like Helen Keller. Nothing is deleted you have to travel so far into the future that you predict the past this is why world lines travel backwards in time such as the arrow of time we all share as objects with free will in free space as varying matter anti matter paradoxes.. "
👍👍
About six minutes of thoughtful insight followed by a great deal of bullshit.
ou
It was this kind of thinking spreading in the 60's that has put us in such a mess today
So, this is between the will of God and the God of need. The will of God is the father, the real God, and the God in need is mother, the human creation, the unreal that has completely shrouded the real God, in so much that now in some religions such as Hinduism and catholicism there is only the mother.
rubbish
How so if you are indeed religious set aside your religious thinking and look at the world right now and tell me hes wrong
And I'm sure you know this is rubbish based on your superior intellect, right?
I have definitely heard some religious overtones in Fromm speeches. He references many religious thinkers. I think this may be his one fault in his worldview.