Insights with Rene Girard
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 дек 2009
- Recorded December 7, 2009
First describing the triangular structure of desire -- object, model, and subject -- Girard tells how conflicts are resolved and why human society is not marked by total conflict all the time. He further speaks of the intersection of the universal themes of mythology and Christianity and Christianity's future. History . . . is a test of mankind, says Rene Girard, and mankind is failing that test.
If you read the comments here praising Girard and start agreeing to them, you're already experiencing mimetic desire.
As Peter Thiel said, in the 22nd century humans will look back to Girard as one of the great intellectuals of our time.
"I don't know. [And,] I don't want to make up an answer."
Here is a man with a profound understanding of Conflict. Quite astonishing.
may he rest in peace
Why would he not rest in peace? He's dead. He's not moving around some place.
Amen
This is by far the best Uncommon Knowledge episode. Completely different plain of reasoning.
His memetic theory is a universal true. We can see it clearly everywhere we go. Now, desires are boosted by our environment which are ultimately a result of our passions and necessities as well. I'd only point that our primitive needs are not fostered by this memetic desire, and in this sense these needs dispute with our desires the legitimacy of our actions.
So glad you got this interview before he passed.
Rene Girard is in my mind was one of the most influential humans the world has not seen yet. like Peter,Paul, a Prophet or one of those who where present at the Nicene Creed, ect. . If you were draw to something he said, check out the professors who studied him.and their protege' (Baxter Kruger,Andre Rabe are a couple I enjoy how Rene has influenced them. Be Blessed and continue to be enlightened y'all!
He is? He barely registers a pulse. And I didn't get far into the video but so far everything he said defies logic and reason. We're just too smart to revert back to this earlier style of discourse where facts are useless.
why is this man a secret? Thiel sent me :)
This dude is deep! Thank you RUclips algorithm!
but there is always the first person who desires something, so where does this desire come from?
I enjoyed this very much.I am doing graduate work in theology and am very interested in Girard's work. Thank you.
Christianity destroys mythology says René Girard. I would have loved to see his reaction to Jordan Peterson's Biblical lectures where mythology was front and centre.
Now I understand advertising, and San Francisco real-estate
I love this man.
Brilliant this affirms what i say in debates, the religion and gods are created by the culture , there purely the imagination of the intellect; but Christianity is different it makes the community and culture guilty and goes against it.
+alysdexia i have no idea who you are debating but clearly freedom only comes from righteousness and enslavement from sin therefore i affirm the will of man but i also affirm that a man may freely will to do one thing but through the corruption of sin a will is forced to do another. Now let me give a example a man who is imprisoned in a jail may desire to be free and leave but because of the chains and bars by the warden he is forced to go against his will even though he wills to do another. So here is where Jesus Christ comes in by defeating the warden he is able to come to the will and say choose this day . thus giving the will another choice rather then being stuck with only one.
+alysdexia a rotten tree is only produced through a outside influence. what is the cause of a bad tree. no water = no holy spirit no pruner = no father , no jesus = no solid foundation . the will chooses choices and choices are influenced by the outside world and the world is severly influened by satans will and the world is predetermined and under control by GOD for he knows the only possible choices that can be made for he can see the persuasive influences over them like the wind John 8;3 and likewise with his power plays a active role in everything. a will is only as free as the amount of choices givin to it. therefore i believe in limited will that can made free by rioteousness or enslaved by sin.
+alysdexia I disagree Jesus surely believes a disobedient sinful tree can produce good fruit eventually through the right influence and waiting on the tree to repent. a bad three can become a good tree through the right caring on are part(keeper) . i understand the parable is corparate israel but it is applicable to individual trees. i leave you with this ezekial 13:19-21
1. i disagree you are wrong from both a philosophical standpoint and a biblical theology. crookedness does not come from freedom alone it can be produced from both standpoints in order or freedom, tyranny or anarchy. Even Adam in the order and freedom given unto him by GOD was influenced by the enemy to do evil. freedom does not necessarily equal chaos or being wild. rather the exercise thereof, when a good tree receives termites then it becomes bad, outside influence . Romans and John 8:32-34 disagrees with you on a theological view to.
2. i disagree here 2 the microscopic world around us is as important as the outside that surrounds it , so li,likewise a tree exists for both the inside and outside, the fruit will not be produced with the inner workings being good or able.
3. Despite the latin lets turn to what the hebrew and greek mindset is and as it was original written for.
I am sorry but the original intention of this was not a purely physicalist perspective but rather they knew what they were meaning by the soul/life of man. this was not supplemented by modern ideas of the body but rather it was describing the other part of the brain with full intention that the will and thoughts come forth from beyond the metaphysical into the spiritual and are actualized in the brain. sence the body and the soul are one , the process is just about instant.
This is enough for now the rest you are wrong two, and lastly as someone who has tested both sides from evil bible .com and the bible, i have found no mistakes.
alysdexia
+alysdexia I think you would love Andre Rabe A conversation on perception "from always loved.
Thanks.
At 19:59: are too committed. should read: are too timid.
19:20 exactly.
Fashion explained.
the interviewer is fantastic.
I think I have that same mug. From Macy's
It kinda gives another reasoning why none of us are God -- because we sin. If a grouped accused any one of us of something, well, there probably was a time when we did something wrong to another person; thus, we do deserve reproach, but thankfully we have Grace. Only Christ was without sin both in myth *and* in history.
and also... technically in Leviticus they kill the pure spottless "sinless" goat and send the goat blamed for the sins of Israel (the scapegoat) out into the wilderness.
the scapegoat isnt actually the one that got harmed, it went away with the mistakes and sins of the people that were atoned, the perfect "lamb of god" is the one who got harmed and sacrificed.
the guy who does the questions is funny
He's the thinking man's Jordan Peterson
what would be girards best work to read regarding his view on mimesis and conflict?
@77scar It was in some circumstances. Read Josephus' accounts of Jewish nonviolent actions before or during the life of Jesus. Sometimes they succeeded, sometimes not. We might say that they had a better success rate than war.
What year did this interview take place?
2009
2020...this is all very applicable
Ok what am I missing here.. there's an object (of potential desire) a subject (another person) who desires it, and us. If we are simply mimicking their desire, where does their desire come from? How can they desire independently for us to mimic?
Good question. Sort of like asking about the unmoved mover or the original cause... Maybe they are mimicking someone else or they desire something or someone because it reminds them of someone else. Could be that the person reminds them of their mother or father and early infancy bonds a la Freud.
oaxacachaka I mean isn't that the first question that ought to come up? If there's an unmoved mover, then this whole theory is much weaker, and you can only maybe attribute some portion of peoples decision making to it. It's an unfinished explanation.
Desires life force--need and wants, etc. Desire requires a model that we inherit from our culture, which goes back forever. Models can be healthy or unhealthy, but they must be given as there is no clean slate. Common needs and limited objects start conflict, and mimesis blows it up to infinity as it refracts or reflects outward into a tribe or collective. The shadow cast is death-force or dead desire, which is ultimately and spontaneously cast out into a scapegoat. Myths are the shroud of the original chaos or nullity that doesn't remember. It's pretty much a complete enough theory for me at the moment and kind of explains why people aggregate around the cross afflicted by mimesis and guilt.
A subject isn't another desiring person. Another desiring person is a "model"; a subject is you as the desiring person (think "subjectivity")
You are misinterpreting the theory. There is not necessarily a subject who desires the object in order to create desire. For instance, when you see someone happy with a new car in an ad, that creates desire because the desire to have is ultimately the desire to be. The car ,in itself, is not what makes it desirable, but the association between the happinnes expressed by the individual in the ad and the object of desire - the car.
Imitate Christ, not behave like Christians.
God allows scapegoating to happen, it is because He wants humanity to exist and so forth.............. hmmm
Interesting
I think you completely missed Jean Gove's point.
so essentially humans are in constant conflict because they want the same thing but both can't have it. The only way to turn this conflict into peace is through a scapegoat. I cant see how jesus fits into this. someone help
Here in 2023
I could be related to this guy hahaha
I apologize. I totally misread your comment. Bad day.... Sorry.
Not a chance of following you on Twitter as I refuse to open an account.
this interviewer is friggin funny
@ManACanadian lol, calling Rene Girard ignorant...who are you?
The more I listen the less I understand
i am surprised by how many interviewers simply demand an explanation of a quote, i.e., "you said this..., now explain!" in my opinion, this is not proper technique in an interview. the question should be a question, not a demand.
What about Buddhism? Is it also does work as Christianity into braking up violence and sacrifices?
too bad Gené never saying anything about Buddhism. ....
Actually, Girard details the sacrificial systems of Hinduism and Buddhism's critique of it. www.amazon.com/Sacrifice-Breakthroughs-Mimetic-Theory-Girard-ebook/dp/B006TRFV0W/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1478814112&sr=8-1&keywords=sacrifice+girard
Buddhism is about the EXTINGUISING of desire. It fully understands what is at work in human affairs, yet chooses to encourage people to turn away from it.
Yes, Buddhism also stresses on compassion, forgiveness, and self-denial life
En förnyelse av teologins tankeform genom antropologi? Ur kristen synpunkt bör ju antropologi och teologi flyta samman.
Do you think Peter Robinson is actually getting what Girard is saying!?
Oedipus didn't kill his father and his mother. he killed his father (Laius) and slept with his mother (Jocasta) and fathered 4 children off her body. He was not killed. He blinded himself and was exiled from the community. Can we please get the essential details right?
@xxueajsqxx behave like christians, but not BE christians?
@MsRedjay I'm confused, are you disappointed that critical thinking can lead to "appallingly conservative" (whatever that is) conclusions, or are you disappointed in your inability to be intellectually honest?
A French Rationalist but a Christian Catholic is interviewed by a Hoover Institute scholar whose best known book is How Ronald Reagan Changed My Life (!) on the crowd pleasing RUclips concludes with a Sunday School lesson for American viewers. Who'd thunk the world, life and all that would be so easy to figure out. Joseph Campbell and the Power of Myth is much better as is the series narrated by Susan Sarandon. Suggested reading in the Wikipedia article on Campbell has a list that is much more interesting.
I think Girard would vibe with Jordan Peterson were he alive today
@michigan6443 YOU were in error when you said "He should of said ". You should have said "He should have said". :-)
that's the first thing I thought. It negates his whole "christianity is different" thesis, doesn't it?
Jesus denies the charges. He is not against the Law and his kingdom is not of this world. He is DESIGNED as guilty by the romans and the sadducees, exactly as girardian theory says.
Investment banker? whut... reporters be damned...somebody make a theory about that lowlight pls
If only you could have interviewed him prior to his death.
What if Christ was guilty? If he were a Jewish partisan, part of the Persian Jews, and fought the Romans as part of the Persian Wall against Rome...
All this erudition and discourse to persuade themselves and the world that Christianity is the one and only true religion.
I find it just embarrassing. Even if Girard’s thesis about the uniqueness of Christianity were accepted, it would not demonstrate a divine origin. For instance, perhaps Christianity is unique due to a set of historical and sociological circumstances that drove biblical authors to sympathize with victims (indeed, Max Weber’s explanation is as follows: the Bible’s authors sympathize with victims because they were themselves victims as subjects of the great empires of the Near East).
Thomistic western metaphysics already points there as well as experience of course and we all recognize selfless Love as the highest good. Girard is showing these truths at the level of experienced reality. You seem to be the one trying to reassure himself here.
without revelation from the Bible, all options for one's world view are equally possible ( materialism, scientism, naturalism, secularism, nihilism, Buddhism, ..etc)
without a Creator, Buddhism seems the most noble path....
If there exists a Creator, Christianity may be a better choice
Concluding thought: we can't prove absolutely the truth of a religion. We should follow our own hearts.
Oh, and I almost forgot to mention the rather OBVIOUS fact that Christians, Jews and Muslims, the three peas in the Abrahamic pod, all equally scapegoat women.
What? For what? You mean Eve story? You mean like God asking a man why have you done what you have done? God is not blaming Eve but Adam. Other than that? How can you "scapegoat" someone that is being in a mode of protection. It basicly proves you do not understand the R. Girard. He is showing known and powerful figures and mostly man as scapegoats. Christianity,Jews, Muslims are not viewing women as powerful...... Man is afraid of woman and percieve her as powerful, but collectivly women are not percieved as powerful, unless they are involved in huge intrigue.
I dont think hes that profound or accurate...most of what hes doing is describing a section of humanity that does not think for themself and always look externally for confirmation of the correctness of their own decisions and desires...and then hes confusing it with memetics.
a. he seems to dodge the influence of power structures in the promotion of manufactured desire and percieved value and the minipulation that has always been there.
b. the scapegoat mechanism is largely due to power structures or individuals trying to control a population by way of identifying a scapegoat to abuse as a way for that authority to associate itself with the people in the peoples own mind. You cant discount the aspects of power and control from an outside source be it a dictator, government, leaders, religion, group etc from the scapegoat tactic that they employ.
c. if people live in a place because there is water, its not a magical effect that increases conflict, its that water is a finite resource and as population increases so does SCARCITY, it is the scarcity, real or perceived, that sometimes is the cause of conflict.
d. only childeren and insecure adults see that others desire something and desire it just because they do. If a person does desire that object its usually because they see something in thatbobject that may satisfy their own instrinsic need for certain values.
e. a living being IS NOT equatable to an intimate object and a finite natural resource although somewhat more equatable to the first is NOT equatable to the later.
f. if there is a girl you like and some other guys interest in her reaffirms to you that you were right to be interested in her...than you are an asshole!!! who does not love or think for himself and who never judged her off of her own value but by an external representation of value.
its of no surprise that religious people have a massive confusion about desire considering your innate sense of desire is something that religion fractures in order to place external desires within your and repetitively tell you that it is your desire and not theirs that is wrong. I think a large part of his memetic desire philosophy smells like an excuse to where the meme itself becomes another scapegoat for crypto religion so they can be excused of their purposeful ignorance
we dividing ourselves or being purposefully divided so others have power, and the deaths of Oedipus nor Jesus helped, Ceaser just told us that it did.
Just another sophist in the service of church.
So in your anonymous and esteemed estimation, Girard is deliberately using fallacious reasoning, he's an intellectual charlatan and morally unscrupulous...and we should take your word for it because you are too intellectually lazy to rebut his position(s)...but we should accept your opinion as valuable anyway....no.
respetcability is the trap !
I do find it odd that he is a practicing Christian and I should like to know whether intimately he is atheistic because he exposes Christianity as myth quite clearly and then goes on to practice it.
Just another half wit with a keyboard
he embraces it as the myth which is true. A myth is a story, not a tall tale.
this guy is so over-rated