People do not keep a consistent logic. By and large, they will adapt their logic to each situation. They use “logic” to confirm personal biases and to convey to others they are just. This is a flimsy foundation for moral ethic. It creates a confused individual that isn’t at all confused. It splits the psyche and facilitates a unconscious war between the subconscious and conciousness, ultimately manifesting into despotism if left un checked.
This is a bit long and I really just wanted to share the last few points but I had to quote everything leading up to them so there would be a better understanding. If you know Peterson you know how he expands on things to an almost painful extent. This was taken from a lecture I’ll link to below.
Part of the reason we have political discussion, or, discussion at all is to separate the wheat from the chaff. The reason that free speech is so important, as far as I’m concerned, well I don’t even really think about it as free speech, I think about it, as what; respect for the manifestation of the Logos or something like that. Thats the proper way of conceptualizing it, is that it keeps the balance between those two tendencies (tendencies between the – Left, pathological chaos – and the – Right, pathological order).
You need the questioning and you need the order. And so you think, well how much of each? And the answer is: the recipe changes day to day. And so you think, if it changes day today then how do we keep up? And the answer is: by keeping up, here we are, we’re alive, we can keep up – but we do that by thinking, and we think by talking, and we think and talk by disagreeing. We better disagree, conceptually, because then we don’t have to act out stupid ideas that would kill us.
The abstract territory of conceptual dispute is a substitute for war and death. And it can be a brutal substitute because conceptual disagreement can be very intense, but compared to war and death it’s hardly intense at all. So you keep the landscape open for serious dispute, including dispute that’s offensive, obviously, because if you’re ever going to talk about anything that’s difficult – and why talk otherwise – then you’re going to talk about things that are offensive to people and you’re going do it badly.
You’re going to stumble around when you’re formulating your thoughts, and that’s horrible, it makes people anxious, it alienates them, but it’s better than pain and death, and that’s the alternative.
Jordan Peterson
In his book “How the Mind Works”, Steven Pinker uses the computational theory of mind to explain how the mind works, which states that the mind operates like a computer. This coupled with Darwinian thought explains how we developed an intrinsic morality. It appears that Jung also agrees morality is intrinsic to us humans, not requiring some religous doctrine for morality.
It should never be forgotten that morality was not brought down on tablets of stone from Sinai and imposed upon the people, but is a function of the human soul, as old as humanity itself. Morality is not imposed from the outside; we have it in ourselves from the start – not the law, but our moral nature without which the collective life of human society would be impossible. This is why morality is found at all levels of society. It is the instinctive regulator of action which also governs the collective life of the herd.
Carl Jung
Using the Tarot is a way of communicating with the unconscious. The more one learns about the psyche and unconscious, the better tuned his/her intuition will be, and will have a more complete understanding / interpretation of the Tarot.
The main reason I am reading this book is for the second essay “The Relations Between the Ego and the Unconscious”. This essay is about the danger of what Jung calls ego inflation. This at times is a consequence after someone has a revelatory experience. “Ego inflation” is to erase the relationship / the boundary between the specific consciousness of the ego and the more generalized consciousness as such, which is a dangerous thing to do, something I feel I currently need help with. So this is a document that tells you how to avoid that if one is playing in these realms.
Everything this man says is quotable. To me he is one of the most empowering speakers. With this quote he is speaking in relation to universities but obviously you do not need a university to attain what he’s talking about. This is the reason why I have made a decision to dedicate just about all my “free/idle time” to doing something constructive and it has created a positive feedback loop that empowers me daily.
“Read great books.” Libraries are “full of the writings of people that are intelligent and articulate beyond comprehension.”
He asks why do you go to university to learn all this? He replies with “you learn it to get a job, or you learn it to get good grades, or you learn it to get a degree, and that’s all nonsense! It’s all nonsense!” “The reason you come to university to be educated is because there is nothing more powerful than someone who is articulate and who can think and speak. It’s power! And I mean power of the best sort! Its authority and influence and respectability and competence. So you come to university to craft your highest skill, your highest skill is found in articulated speech. If you’re a master in formulating your arguments you win everything! And better than that when you win everything everyone around you wins too. Consider your transformation to something approximating the Logos, it means you shine a light on the whole world!.”
“Be who you could be, and with the highest faculty of the human being is articulated speech, it’s the divine faculty and there is nothing more powerful than that! There’s nothing even in the same league.”
ErudiTarot 