It's like a Boutique Perspective store and the price for the items is really expensive. But then the clerk brings out a custom made golden gown and ensures you it was set aside for 13 dollars. Thank you David. You offer something else to this conversation, I can't quite put my finger on. Arigato Ken. Bonjour Johnathan!
Yes, Jesus was not the revelation of a reversal. It was the revelation of all things. Universality in all particularity & true hierarchy (the higher loves/serves the lower), life in death.
Jonathan Pageau has completely reified the up-down representation and while it allows him to pick up some patterns because it is partially correct, he twists these and verticalizes everything, into a single linear spatial dimension -- as well as elects the top as the ultimate, the bottom only instrumentally existing to raise beings back to the top. This representational way of thinking makes it so that truth can no longer show itself of its own accord. It is therefore a properly diabolical schema, and not a symbol. Hear this: God is not at the top. God is at the center and around and throughout. The top is not better, it could not even exist on its own. And WE ARE NOT AT THE BOTTOM. We are the center, we live at the very point of convergence of the realms/dimensions of matter, images and intelligences. And there is no other place. The "material world" doesn't exist, it wasn't created from above. The WORLD was created by God, with different converging dimensions, one of them the material. These dimensions meet forever and eternally in this one place. God is this, grounds this.
Indeed. If you attune to the timbre of this conversation, and let the content go, through the lens of Plato's Critique of Impure Reason.... what do you hear?
@@climbingmt.sophia I hear a multi-voiced symphony, with elements of beauty and chaos, and hints of wonder. However I hear a recurring false note reflected in the Up-Down representation. If almost everything has to come through this same representation to become intelligible then it has become probably an idol. I hear this particularly when Pageau says that the Christian story is ultimate, in a completely novel and exclusive way, that it overcomes and integrates all other myths and religions.
@@climbingmt.sophia Yes, what are you referring to? It seems to me this implies that simply running with the vertical symbol only risks reifying itself into a narrowly identifiable "corner" (a little corner of the internet).
@ben Ezra perhaps if the vertical symbolization is not in service of a horizontal Dialogos, it is a form of idolatry... this would certainly be a dynamic shifting, of which I find myself most often on the idolatrous side
Great conversation! Thanks for bringing Jonathan and D.C. Schindler together. Regarding the Imaginal…..we are going through the The Imagination essay by George MacDonald. I believe it’s the latest livestream. If you’re interested, we are looking for people to join! 😉 Edit: on Grail Country
Truly incredible! Great guidance of the conversation Ken, pushing it in important directions and developing ideas at multiple levels. Please let this not be the last time the three of you get together.
I know for a fact that I come from God because when I try to listen at witchcraft when I try to understand it, I just don’t it confuses me but the word of God it comes so simple to me. I understand it so well and I guess for somebody from the devil day maybe they can’t understand the word of God they need interpretation, but I just hear it so well so clear I wish everybody could hear God the way I do they would never deal with the devil.
Man, what a great conversation. "..making known to us the mystery of His will.. which he set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite (reconcile) all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth."
I love the part of their discussion around gratitude. The word Eucharist, the term used by both Orthodox, Catholics, and some of the mainline Protestants for, means "Thanksgiving/Thankfulness."
1:07:45 - Moses, sacrificing the lower to the higher, Gregory of Nyssa - life of Moses, Dovine Darkness, Tabernacle, garments of skin come back. When I practiced (whatever ritual) the mountains were mountains and rivers, rivers, and after…the MOUNTAINS WERE MOUNTAINS AND THE RIVERS WERE RIVERS. Sacrifice the propositions, and they will come back. Spiral/iconic knowing.
I'd like to talk with you guys if you are up for a proto indo European mythology perspective with a heavy dose of Carl Jung. It would add to your exploration of symbolism.
Articulate to me the "problem" of religious syncretism. It seems to me that this is a big part of the Christian shadow. Christianity, being a highly syncretized religion, must at all costs disassociate itself from it's own syncretism. Christianity as the crowning achievement of religious syncretism must at all costs disavow religious syncretism.
Pageau blows my mind. I don't want to monopolize your comments sections, but I have a lot of feels about the denunciation of religious syncretism in the same talk as a recognition of the alchemists....
@@adrianstumpp5883Part of this shadow is also probably because Jonathan was born a Protestant in an utterly Catholic province which became radically atheistic, and then he became Eastern Orthodox. In the same way, he is a french speaker but speaks publicly in english. This inherent plurality, contradiction, interpenetration and impermanence of all things seems to be designated by him as "the border" (might as well say shadow).
@@climbingmt.sophia fair enough. I had this thought shortly after making the original comment, that it was too much to unpack in the comments section. To me, Christianity seems to be the highest form of syncretism and yet acknowledging this seems to be anathema to many Christians. The lady doth protest too much me thinks.
1:06:50 Divided Man, divided world. Subject-object divide. The nature of the God-Man relation. People in either-or or competition mode cannot make this move.
Great conversation! Thanks for bringing Jonathan and D.C. Schindler together. Regarding the Imaginal…..we are going through the The Imagination essay by George MacDonald. I believe it the latest livestream. If you’re interested, we are looking for people to join! 😉
57:40 “”…you have your desires you have a type of pull, that pull is good it’s actually God that made that pulled but if it gets captured for itself that’s when it becomes a problem…” Dante’s desiderio, Dr McGilchrist’s longing, belonging….so important, desire….
Amazing really. You’ve added to the corner significantly. I would like to share something with you. I’ll paste below. Dear Ken, I am a subscriber and came across you via Pageau. I was climbing the same mountain, but now I’ve set up camp very close to the summit and am enjoying the view. My name is Stacy. I was baptized in 2010 at the age of 47. Up to that point I had been agnostic at best. I had not been raised Christian, but my parents went headlong into Mormonism for a few years when I was I teen- which really seems odd as I would bet that none of us individually believed it. In any case, by the time I was 16 our Mormonism was on the wane and I had found a new, more tangible god. From my late teens until my mid-thirties I worshiped at the alter of the Japanese culture. This means I was very into animism- the underlying idea that everything, even the inanimate, contains spirit. I think this idea impregnates the Japanese culture quite literally. And this is precisely what I found most attractive- this and the presence of ritual and symbolism everywhere. However, despite my deep penetration into the culture, I did not embrace Buddhism or Shinto; both which have elements of animism. Simply, I didn’t really believe in spirit. It was just fun, like Halloween-fun. In a nutshell, Japan was infinitely interesting to my younger mind. I think I was a Japanophile before it was commonplace. But while Japan was my idol, like Mormonism, I knew that this cultural entity was not the source of all things. Sure, it gave me meaning and purpose, but it did not answer the existential “Why am I here?” and “Where am I going?” questions for me. Of course this is primarily due to the fact that I had taken a more post-war Japanese view of religion which was essentially apathetic. So, while I was into Japan, I had come to realize my lust was shallow. Perhaps this led me to studying existential philosophy. This in turn led me to Kierkegaard who strangely became my favorite despite my materialist worldview. I tend to think that a near death experience I’d had as a child had stirred up feelings that made me want the kind of belief Kierkegaard described. I often said to myself, “If I were to become a Christian Kierkegaard is the kind of Christian I’d like to be.” But since I did not want to be Christian (I think my early Mormonism exposure killed my Christianity) nothing changed for me. By my late thirties I was done with Japan. My addiction had run its course. I was working and living- “well” by outward appearances, but I was a broken person. I was living in a box of my own nihilism and pain. Suicidal ideation was a regular part of my existence. I would have remained there if not for a set of circumstances that pointed me toward Christianity as something I needed to contend with. In the end, I ended up accepting Christ on the basis of the evidence for the resurrection. I like to say that I backed into my faith. For the next six years I went through the good Protestant Christian motions- took all the classes, volunteered, served, joined a small group and so on. But a few years in, I experienced a situation that nearly took me out. From that point forward I recognized the weakness of my belief. It was like I had a stable floor, a foundation, but I had no real hope- no sky. Believing that Christ died for me on its own was sadly insufficient to hold me up. I understood, but at the same time something was lacking. To escape, I retired early and moved to the woods- the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. There I could at least breath. Then, just before/during the start of the pandemic I decided to study apologetics with the Colson fellowship program. I didn’t mention this, but I’m analytical- a data geek. I thought maybe if I stopped relying on pastors and dug in I’d figure out my faith problem. The program was intense, and naturally I took it seriously. At the end, we were all to come up with a three-year plan to use our learnings in the real world. My plan was a bit crazy, but I thought more than prove the existence of God or evangelizing directly, what I needed to do was create a desire for meaning. I had that desire myself since I was young, but I didn’t see it in most others. And even when I found others who would speak existentially, the seemed lost…nihilistic rather. This was a particular concern of mine as I had people close to me who were often on the edge. So my plan was something like “pre-evangelism” using Kierkegaard’s stages along life’s way. And to this end, I created an existential philosophy group called “Philosophy in the Forest” that gathered in “Fishosophical de Baits,” a tiny cabin in the middle the Hiawatha National Forest. The activities inside contained a good bit of Kierkegaard crossed with GK Chesterton (for the TGB end of things…to get at the Truth which is beyond reason). And people came…not a lot, but honestly it was cool and it brought people together. But after three seasons of operating the philosophy hut, I closed for the winter and reflected. I realized that while I was running around trying to help everyone else become existentially aware, I had not resolved my own issues in this regard. Who was I really? Between intense visions, dreams, J.I. Packer’s “Knowing God” (an almost ignored selection among my Colson readings), Chesterton- and a bit of dabbling into some Christian mystics, I came to realize how much I needed to reduce myself in order to understand who God really was and what my response needed to be. I was struggling to get from head knowledge to practical daily application- the consistent living out of my faith as God expected. I realized, during this season of rest, that I couldn’t continue to lead anything until I got myself in order. This is when I found the Pageau brothers (…discovered via Jordan Peterson whom I had come across when looking for ways to reach an important young man in my life.). From there I did a lot of cross referencing between podcasters to check myself. In the end, I have ended up in an Eastern Orthodox space. I can’t tell you in written language how profoundly orthodoxy has changed my life. It has affected my sense of time and space profoundly. It has significantly turned me away from analyzing, controlling, manipulating, worrying and so on, so that I am able to have more peaceful joy in Gods presence. It started with the prayers, the orthodox prayers, which I said on my own. From there I desired an icon…three icons actually. Then, with each time I’ve attended the church and felt unity with both others and heavenly hosts, I feel a great sense of hope…the hope I didn’t genuinely possess when I first became a Christian and even after years of participating in several decent Protestant churches. I actually laugh now at my path. I laugh with joyful tears despite a messy past that often rears up (as sin does…). As I came to EO, I recalled something significant in my past. You see the very first time I went to Tokyo in 1980 at the age of 16, I saw an beautiful building that seemed very out of place. I know now that it was the Orthodox Church. Then I think of how I was attracted to Japanese ritual- the way it fits with the aesthetics and symbolism of EO. I craved these things naturally. Of course, there’s also my philosophical leanings…and Kierkegaard who is still relevant to me. I suspect he would have been comfortable in orthodoxy had he tried it through prayer. I’ve heard many whom I follow on RUclips talk about the meaning crisis and “our little corner of the internet.” To me, “the corner” is working out God’s will. The sheep and the goats are being separated in a different way than before and this very well could be the last call. It has been a long strange trip hasn’t it? Sorry this has been long. I wanted to give you this testimony as we have some similarities. I have no other way to reach you. If this doesn’t seem to reach you I’ll try another way perhaps later. Stacy G
@@jonathonray6198 thank you. Lots of typos in that- so I’m glad you were able to read it. I was riding in a car down a bumpy winter warped road when I felt the need to express my joy. My your journey upon reflection be joyful as well. Stacy g
@@fishosoficaldebaitsphiloso7760 Loved your description/ articulation of Japanese animism. 👍 Now that I know it’s called animism, what was in the shadows to me before (regarding Japan’s spirituality) makes sooooo much more sense now… Thank you, for helping us understand. 👍❤️ God bless you & hope to see you around in the corner, again! ❤️
The Buddhist strawman/ punchung bag, in this corner, IS A THING. ^^ 😅 I guess I have something to “make right”, once I some day decide to put myself before the camera, in this corner; to un-strawman this strawman… ^^ 🤷♂️👍❤️
52:45 yes! Fantasy vs imagination. Subjective-objective world vs the world of the Personal (where the dichotomy doesn’t apply, and solipsism is an illusion). Divided Man.
Around 57:00 I think Pageau is taking about the Dream which I see as different than iconic vision or iconic thinking or the imaginal. It’s symbolic THINKING. The THOUGHTS are symbolic (nondual, not either-or).
Someone finally did it!! I have been deep diving into Schindler's views on freedom and love and his book, Love and the Postmodern Predicament is one of my favourites. Great work.
20:00 Jonathan has continued to develop this particular line of thought regarding the margins, carnival, the cherub as seat for the sacred, “madness playing on a little hint of truth,” etc. so articulately to explain how we’ve gotten to “drag queen as sacred.” It’s a really impressive and enlightening line of connection. And yet….while I understand fully his caution and why he is focused on pointing out the luciferian/diabolical nature of this cultural movement….sometimes the baby seems to get thrown out with the bath water, specifically regarding psychedelics, events of the 1960s, etc…..would love to see his stance on evil/sin as disordered *good* at 23:36 applied in a slightly more nuanced way to these things, so that they might be integrated properly. Ken, I see you hinting at this with your question here. 41:30 cool to hear Jonathan mention Florensky here, his is a name I’d love to hear more around TLC - and just more engagement with the 19-20th century Russians in general 48:43 “a nervousness about allowing the physical world to have this kind of meaningfulness…it puts a claim on us” - absolutely….& might the nervousness also come from that meaningfulness bringing us face-to-face with suffering/the problem of evil in a way that we typically try to avoid at all costs?
thoughts at 53:13- The rung on the ladder that each one is working can be imagined as having a roof above and a floor beneath it. It is a container of space with the margins of growth allowed. Once that space has been mastered (or harvested at best) through grace we might be allowed to climb higher. It is not accepting the limits that God puts on us and trying to "outsmart" the assignment or design plan that turns it to the diabolical. The creation always trying to rename or recreate his own way into the plan that God said "go do".
Thanks for organising this, Ken. David's voice is tremendously valuable in this space and, likewise, Plato's Critique of Pure Reason has been one of the most impactful books I've read in my life!
I made a clip of where Pageau spoke of how postmodernism was the gateway that blew the locks off his mind toward symbolism & mystical/apophatic knowing. Awesome. Me, too. Now if he would adopt my emphasis of *personalist* knowing, which is the implication of JDW’s work and the unity of all of Vervaeke’s 4 Ps. :)
Luke, work needs to be done on articulating the personalist knowing better, with concrete examples that help people see what you see (including me). I’d propose doing in in the style of Jonathan Pageau - using plenty of analogies from the real world AND possibly from the Bible. 👍 Explained slowly; like Pageau does it; so that people can follow along in how your analogy explains what you’re trying to convey. Additionally: Why is personalist knowing more accurate? & how to EmBody this new way of personalist knowing in out daily lives ❤ Or not. 🤷♂️❤️
@@maximosmagyar9653 Man! I talk about it a lot. I have a ton of videos on playlists in my youtube channel thing...But I'm also hard to follow because I'm not linear and very idiosyncratic. I make up all my own terms. Apparently John Paul II was a big personalist. I love Gabriel Marcel.
As brilliant as Jonathan's symbolic insight has been, it's been long overdue in this space to hear a perspective on the subject that might provide some added depth and even a degree of counterbalance. Although in this initial conversation there is some talking past each other in order to establish respective views, it's generous of Jonathan to allow for a give and take with a newcomer into TLC when it comes to his veritable calling card. I'll be very interested to see how David's subtlety of thought works through the paradigmatic approach of Jonathan and what gems of insight come out of it to enrich and strengthen the evangelium.
@@maximosmagyar9653 to give an example, at one point David wanted to focus in on the fact that "carnivals are fun". I think this remark immediately registered with Jonathan's extensively worked-out symbolic worldview to which he offered a straightforward explanation. However, my sense was that David was looking to mutually explore the point of "fun" in greater depth. It could be that Jonathan's explanation answered David's concern, but it felt a bit like a missed opportunity.
Jonathan has an obsession with the vertical symbolic dimension (Peterson has it but manifested a little bit different). He puts what is up to the top as the ultimate, everything depending on the top. This creates a particular kind of symptomology, I've heard him say many times that “this world (meaning the contemporary materialistic society) is horrible”; I definitely don't want to think this about the world that I inhabit. I've had some psychiatric issues, and I've tried to explored myself in my journey coping with this issues, I feel in my bodypsyche something off when I take this perspective to the extreme, something unhealthy. Although I consider his worldview very valuable, I'm a little bit tired of it, that's why I try to hear from him much less, same with Jordan Peterson.
Sometimes Pageau & Jonathan are both uncareful & “all over the place” with their words… Use discernment. “Judge the wheat from the chaff.”, as we do with anyone. ❤️
In this video, Pageau says everything in the world, even your passions, all of it is good, if it is in it's proper place. Good not horrible. Jonathan Pageau regularly speaks about the fractal nature of reality; this includes vertical symbolic thinking but it's only part of the fractal pattern he is trying to explain. Hope that helps.
I don't think that is his position. Look for his commentary on "gnosticism", and how Christianity is different because all creation is pulled toward God through the incarnation of Christ. He often said that "everything is good in his right place", and we, as mediators between Heaven and Earth, have the responsibility to make it happen.
A symbol is neither solely the blueprint & meaning, nor the individual instantiation of the thing. A symbol (which etymologically means something like 'two paths merging into one') is precisely the bringing together of a blueprint and meaning into an individual, physical instantiation. It's the meeting of heaven (the incorporeal) and earth (the corporeal). That is how I understand it, at least.
This was amazing. Maybe my favourite pageau conversation ever. It’s up there. Now pageau needs to directly address James Lindsay’s new venture into critiquing mysticism. Because that is like the apocalypse right there 😂 I need to watch this again and take notes.
@@maximosmagyar9653 James Lindsay - who did the grievance study papers exposing some of the ridiculousness of academia and supposed "peer review" process, a kind of typical agnostic/atheist enlightenment classical liberal proponent is now discovering the links between all the critical theories, cultural marxism, post-modern stuff and gnosticism/hermeticism especially via marx and hegel who were both into hermeticism and quote hermetic stuff - hegel especially, and how this is not really philosophy or morality or good-faith dialogue, but rather a way of coopting philosophy, morality, politics, creeds, religions into a cultic process with those who are "in the know" being handed the power. Any way - he is totally convincing on the gnostic and hermetic influences on hegelian, marxist, and critical theories - but beyond that it gets muddy as he doesnt grasp religion well. Just look him up on youtube you will start to find these critiques and he tends to lump all mysticism into this gnostic-hermetic category - perhaps simply as shorthand, but at least out of some ignorance. He makes amazing points, despite his religious ignorance.
Thanks for making this happen Ken
Hi JP!
@@jaredemry170 Hello Reprobus ;)
It's like a Boutique Perspective store and the price for the items is really expensive. But then the clerk brings out a custom made golden gown and ensures you it was set aside for 13 dollars. Thank you David. You offer something else to this conversation, I can't quite put my finger on. Arigato Ken. Bonjour Johnathan!
Yes, Jesus was not the revelation of a reversal. It was the revelation of all things. Universality in all particularity & true hierarchy (the higher loves/serves the lower), life in death.
Jonathan Pageau has completely reified the up-down representation and while it allows him to pick up some patterns because it is partially correct, he twists these and verticalizes everything, into a single linear spatial dimension -- as well as elects the top as the ultimate, the bottom only instrumentally existing to raise beings back to the top.
This representational way of thinking makes it so that truth can no longer show itself of its own accord. It is therefore a properly diabolical schema, and not a symbol.
Hear this: God is not at the top. God is at the center and around and throughout. The top is not better, it could not even exist on its own. And WE ARE NOT AT THE BOTTOM.
We are the center, we live at the very point of convergence of the realms/dimensions of matter, images and intelligences. And there is no other place.
The "material world" doesn't exist, it wasn't created from above. The WORLD was created by God, with different converging dimensions, one of them the material.
These dimensions meet forever and eternally in this one place. God is this, grounds this.
Indeed. If you attune to the timbre of this conversation, and let the content go, through the lens of Plato's Critique of Impure Reason.... what do you hear?
@@climbingmt.sophia I hear a multi-voiced symphony, with elements of beauty and chaos, and hints of wonder. However I hear a recurring false note reflected in the Up-Down representation. If almost everything has to come through this same representation to become intelligible then it has become probably an idol. I hear this particularly when Pageau says that the Christian story is ultimate, in a completely novel and exclusive way, that it overcomes and integrates all other myths and religions.
@@moisebenezra it seems to be quite a pernicious temptation to prioritize content and thus lose harmony
@@climbingmt.sophia Yes, what are you referring to? It seems to me this implies that simply running with the vertical symbol only risks reifying itself into a narrowly identifiable "corner" (a little corner of the internet).
@ben Ezra perhaps if the vertical symbolization is not in service of a horizontal Dialogos, it is a form of idolatry... this would certainly be a dynamic shifting, of which I find myself most often on the idolatrous side
The alchemy of paint & color. The meaning of color?! Hells yes!
My friend prays in colour and form, so beautiful.
I really liked this, Ken. As you can see from the comments. Dang. Thank you.
Ken is on fire lately 🔥
1:05:00 Gratitude, remembering God, Jonah and death/suffering.
Great stuff.
From 1:05:00 till the end is all wonderful, condensed goodness 🏆❤
Great conversation! Thanks for bringing Jonathan and D.C. Schindler together. Regarding the Imaginal…..we are going through the The Imagination essay by George MacDonald. I believe it’s the latest livestream. If you’re interested, we are looking for people to join! 😉
Edit: on Grail Country
Truly incredible! Great guidance of the conversation Ken, pushing it in important directions and developing ideas at multiple levels. Please let this not be the last time the three of you get together.
The luciferian is personal (will and desire) Vs the diabolical is descriptive, pragmatic.
Yes ❤
I know for a fact that I come from God because when I try to listen at witchcraft when I try to understand it, I just don’t it confuses me but the word of God it comes so simple to me. I understand it so well and I guess for somebody from the devil day maybe they can’t understand the word of God they need interpretation, but I just hear it so well so clear I wish everybody could hear God the way I do they would never deal with the devil.
20:30 Symbolism and power
38:34 Postmodernism and brothers way
Man, what a great conversation.
"..making known to us the mystery of His will.. which he set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite (reconcile) all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth."
Jonathan’s there? Subscribed ✅
I love the part of their discussion around gratitude. The word Eucharist, the term used by both Orthodox, Catholics, and some of the mainline Protestants for, means "Thanksgiving/Thankfulness."
1:07:45 - Moses, sacrificing the lower to the higher, Gregory of Nyssa - life of Moses, Dovine Darkness, Tabernacle, garments of skin come back.
When I practiced (whatever ritual) the mountains were mountains and rivers, rivers, and after…the MOUNTAINS WERE MOUNTAINS AND THE RIVERS WERE RIVERS.
Sacrifice the propositions, and they will come back.
Spiral/iconic knowing.
Best 🏆❤️
I'd like to talk with you guys if you are up for a proto indo European mythology perspective with a heavy dose of Carl Jung. It would add to your exploration of symbolism.
I'd love to chat! Reach out to me on Twitter? @kenlowry8
@@climbingmt.sophia Could we do that via discord or email?
@@TheMysticTable sure. Kenneth.w.lowry@gmail.com
Articulate to me the "problem" of religious syncretism. It seems to me that this is a big part of the Christian shadow. Christianity, being a highly syncretized religion, must at all costs disassociate itself from it's own syncretism. Christianity as the crowning achievement of religious syncretism must at all costs disavow religious syncretism.
Pageau blows my mind. I don't want to monopolize your comments sections, but I have a lot of feels about the denunciation of religious syncretism in the same talk as a recognition of the alchemists....
btw, Ken. sorry to spring myself on you like this. Long time lurker. First time troll. I respect what you do.
@@adrianstumpp5883Part of this shadow is also probably because Jonathan was born a Protestant in an utterly Catholic province which became radically atheistic, and then he became Eastern Orthodox.
In the same way, he is a french speaker but speaks publicly in english.
This inherent plurality, contradiction, interpenetration and impermanence of all things seems to be designated by him as "the border" (might as well say shadow).
Yes. Too much, and too tricky to place in written form for me, but I very much resonate with this movement
@@climbingmt.sophia fair enough. I had this thought shortly after making the original comment, that it was too much to unpack in the comments section. To me, Christianity seems to be the highest form of syncretism and yet acknowledging this seems to be anathema to many Christians. The lady doth protest too much me thinks.
Nice pairing Ken.
1:06:50 Divided Man, divided world. Subject-object divide. The nature of the God-Man relation.
People in either-or or competition mode cannot make this move.
Great conversation! Thanks for bringing Jonathan and D.C. Schindler together. Regarding the Imaginal…..we are going through the The Imagination essay by George MacDonald. I believe it the latest livestream. If you’re interested, we are looking for people to join! 😉
Oh that sounds fun! I'll keep an eye out, and join if I can!
57:40 “”…you have your desires you have a type of pull, that pull is good it’s actually God that made that pulled but if it gets captured for itself that’s when it becomes a problem…”
Dante’s desiderio, Dr McGilchrist’s longing, belonging….so important, desire….
Amazing really. You’ve added to the corner significantly. I would like to share something with you. I’ll paste below.
Dear Ken, I am a subscriber and came across you via Pageau. I was climbing the same mountain, but now I’ve set up camp very close to the summit and am enjoying the view.
My name is Stacy. I was baptized in 2010 at the age of 47. Up to that point I had been agnostic at best. I had not been raised Christian, but my parents went headlong into Mormonism for a few years when I was I teen- which really seems odd as I would bet that none of us individually believed it. In any case, by the time I was 16 our Mormonism was on the wane and I had found a new, more tangible god.
From my late teens until my mid-thirties I worshiped at the alter of the Japanese culture. This means I was very into animism- the underlying idea that everything, even the inanimate, contains spirit. I think this idea impregnates the Japanese culture quite literally. And this is precisely what I found most attractive- this and the presence of ritual and symbolism everywhere.
However, despite my deep penetration into the culture, I did not embrace Buddhism or Shinto; both which have elements of animism. Simply, I didn’t really believe in spirit. It was just fun, like Halloween-fun. In a nutshell, Japan was infinitely interesting to my younger mind. I think I was a Japanophile before it was commonplace.
But while Japan was my idol, like Mormonism, I knew that this cultural entity was not the source of all things. Sure, it gave me meaning and purpose, but it did not answer the existential “Why am I here?” and “Where am I going?” questions for me. Of course this is primarily due to the fact that I had taken a more post-war Japanese view of religion which was essentially apathetic. So, while I was into Japan, I had come to realize my lust was shallow. Perhaps this led me to studying existential philosophy. This in turn led me to Kierkegaard who strangely became my favorite despite my materialist worldview.
I tend to think that a near death experience I’d had as a child had stirred up feelings that made me want the kind of belief Kierkegaard described. I often said to myself, “If I were to become a Christian Kierkegaard is the kind of Christian I’d like to be.” But since I did not want to be Christian (I think my early Mormonism exposure killed my Christianity) nothing changed for me.
By my late thirties I was done with Japan. My addiction had run its course. I was working and living- “well” by outward appearances, but I was a broken person. I was living in a box of my own nihilism and pain. Suicidal ideation was a regular part of my existence.
I would have remained there if not for a set of circumstances that pointed me toward Christianity as something I needed to contend with. In the end, I ended up accepting Christ on the basis of the evidence for the resurrection. I like to say that I backed into my faith.
For the next six years I went through the good Protestant Christian motions- took all the classes, volunteered, served, joined a small group and so on. But a few years in, I experienced a situation that nearly took me out. From that point forward I recognized the weakness of my belief. It was like I had a stable floor, a foundation, but I had no real hope- no sky. Believing that Christ died for me on its own was sadly insufficient to hold me up. I understood, but at the same time something was lacking.
To escape, I retired early and moved to the woods- the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. There I could at least breath. Then, just before/during the start of the pandemic I decided to study apologetics with the Colson fellowship program. I didn’t mention this, but I’m analytical- a data geek. I thought maybe if I stopped relying on pastors and dug in I’d figure out my faith problem.
The program was intense, and naturally I took it seriously. At the end, we were all to come up with a three-year plan to use our learnings in the real world. My plan was a bit crazy, but I thought more than prove the existence of God or evangelizing directly, what I needed to do was create a desire for meaning. I had that desire myself since I was young, but I didn’t see it in most others. And even when I found others who would speak existentially, the seemed lost…nihilistic rather. This was a particular concern of mine as I had people close to me who were often on the edge. So my plan was something like “pre-evangelism” using Kierkegaard’s stages along life’s way. And to this end, I created an existential philosophy group called “Philosophy in the Forest” that gathered in “Fishosophical de Baits,” a tiny cabin in the middle the Hiawatha National Forest. The activities inside contained a good bit of Kierkegaard crossed with GK Chesterton (for the TGB end of things…to get at the Truth which is beyond reason).
And people came…not a lot, but honestly it was cool and it brought people together.
But after three seasons of operating the philosophy hut, I closed for the winter and reflected. I realized that while I was running around trying to help everyone else become existentially aware, I had not resolved my own issues in this regard. Who was I really?
Between intense visions, dreams, J.I. Packer’s “Knowing God” (an almost ignored selection among my Colson readings), Chesterton- and a bit of dabbling into some Christian mystics, I came to realize how much I needed to reduce myself in order to understand who God really was and what my response needed to be. I was struggling to get from head knowledge to practical daily application- the consistent living out of my faith as God expected.
I realized, during this season of rest, that I couldn’t continue to lead anything until I got myself in order. This is when I found the Pageau brothers (…discovered via Jordan Peterson whom I had come across when looking for ways to reach an important young man in my life.). From there I did a lot of cross referencing between podcasters to check myself.
In the end, I have ended up in an Eastern Orthodox space. I can’t tell you in written language how profoundly orthodoxy has changed my life. It has affected my sense of time and space profoundly. It has significantly turned me away from analyzing, controlling, manipulating, worrying and so on, so that I am able to have more peaceful joy in Gods presence. It started with the prayers, the orthodox prayers, which I said on my own. From there I desired an icon…three icons actually. Then, with each time I’ve attended the church and felt unity with both others and heavenly hosts, I feel a great sense of hope…the hope I didn’t genuinely possess when I first became a Christian and even after years of participating in several decent Protestant churches.
I actually laugh now at my path. I laugh with joyful tears despite a messy past that often rears up (as sin does…). As I came to EO, I recalled something significant in my past. You see the very first time I went to Tokyo in 1980 at the age of 16, I saw an beautiful building that seemed very out of place. I know now that it was the Orthodox Church. Then I think of how I was attracted to Japanese ritual- the way it fits with the aesthetics and symbolism of EO. I craved these things naturally. Of course, there’s also my philosophical leanings…and Kierkegaard who is still relevant to me. I suspect he would have been comfortable in orthodoxy had he tried it through prayer.
I’ve heard many whom I follow on RUclips talk about the meaning crisis and “our little corner of the internet.” To me, “the corner” is working out God’s will. The sheep and the goats are being separated in a different way than before and this very well could be the last call.
It has been a long strange trip hasn’t it?
Sorry this has been long. I wanted to give you this testimony as we have some similarities. I have no other way to reach you. If this doesn’t seem to reach you I’ll try another way perhaps later. Stacy G
Stacy, thank you for sharing. I would love to chat at some point! The best way to reach me is to message me on Twitter, @kenlowry8
@@climbingmt.sophia I’m sorry Ken I don’t use Twitter, but thank you for the invitation.
Thankyou Stacy your story touched me. I felt I could relate in many ways.
@@jonathonray6198 thank you. Lots of typos in that- so I’m glad you were able to read it. I was riding in a car down a bumpy winter warped road when I felt the need to express my joy. My your journey upon reflection be joyful as well. Stacy g
@@fishosoficaldebaitsphiloso7760 Loved your description/ articulation of Japanese animism. 👍
Now that I know it’s called animism, what was in the shadows to me before (regarding Japan’s spirituality) makes sooooo much more sense now…
Thank you, for helping us understand. 👍❤️
God bless you & hope to see you around in the corner, again! ❤️
30:30 shattering
Can we just get a book list, top ten need to Read from these men?!
36:04 self abandonment. Love and service
The Buddhist strawman/ punchung bag, in this corner, IS A THING. ^^ 😅
I guess I have something to “make right”, once I some day decide to put myself before the camera, in this corner;
to un-strawman this strawman… ^^ 🤷♂️👍❤️
"There's nothing wrong with cake. There's nothing wrong with a hint of chaos." Jonathan likes to live dangerously. 😂
52:45 yes! Fantasy vs imagination. Subjective-objective world vs the world of the Personal (where the dichotomy doesn’t apply, and solipsism is an illusion). Divided Man.
Around 57:00 I think Pageau is taking about the Dream which I see as different than iconic vision or iconic thinking or the imaginal.
It’s symbolic THINKING. The THOUGHTS are symbolic (nondual, not either-or).
I've learned so much. What a great conversation.
Thank you
I could listen to these two all day long. If only Matthieu was in it.
This section around 50:00 on idolatry Vs iconography and Moses/Aaron and mediation is lovely.
The imaginal is the personal. I call it iconic knowing or Eucharistic knowing. Serving God vs mammon.
Someone finally did it!! I have been deep diving into Schindler's views on freedom and love and his book, Love and the Postmodern Predicament is one of my favourites. Great work.
20:00 Jonathan has continued to develop this particular line of thought regarding the margins, carnival, the cherub as seat for the sacred, “madness playing on a little hint of truth,” etc. so articulately to explain how we’ve gotten to “drag queen as sacred.” It’s a really impressive and enlightening line of connection. And yet….while I understand fully his caution and why he is focused on pointing out the luciferian/diabolical nature of this cultural movement….sometimes the baby seems to get thrown out with the bath water, specifically regarding psychedelics, events of the 1960s, etc…..would love to see his stance on evil/sin as disordered *good* at 23:36 applied in a slightly more nuanced way to these things, so that they might be integrated properly. Ken, I see you hinting at this with your question here.
41:30 cool to hear Jonathan mention Florensky here, his is a name I’d love to hear more around TLC - and just more engagement with the 19-20th century Russians in general
48:43 “a nervousness about allowing the physical world to have this kind of meaningfulness…it puts a claim on us” - absolutely….& might the nervousness also come from that meaningfulness bringing us face-to-face with suffering/the problem of evil in a way that we typically try to avoid at all costs?
A phenomenal comment, perceptive & beautifully on point 💪❤️
@@elektrotehnik94 much appreciated!
Flirensky is more of the 20th century Russian. But he is still cool.🙂
Nice. Thanks.
The dream combo!
thoughts at 53:13- The rung on the ladder that each one is working can be imagined as having a roof above and a floor beneath it. It is a container of space with the margins of growth allowed. Once that space has been mastered (or harvested at best) through grace we might be allowed to climb higher. It is not accepting the limits that God puts on us and trying to "outsmart" the assignment or design plan that turns it to the diabolical. The creation always trying to rename or recreate his own way into the plan that God said "go do".
Thanks for organising this, Ken. David's voice is tremendously valuable in this space and, likewise, Plato's Critique of Pure Reason has been one of the most impactful books I've read in my life!
❤
19:03 cake is great, being a cake-eater…less so.
ruclips.net/video/qdrs3gr_GAs/видео.html The Cake is a Lie
Behold a distraction horse.
I made a clip of where Pageau spoke of how postmodernism was the gateway that blew the locks off his mind toward symbolism & mystical/apophatic knowing. Awesome. Me, too.
Now if he would adopt my emphasis of *personalist* knowing, which is the implication of JDW’s work and the unity of all of Vervaeke’s 4 Ps. :)
French and German existentialists blew my dead frame here.
Luke, work needs to be done on articulating the personalist knowing better, with concrete examples that help people see what you see (including me).
I’d propose doing in in the style of Jonathan Pageau - using plenty of analogies from the real world AND possibly from the Bible. 👍
Explained slowly; like Pageau does it; so that people can follow along in how your analogy explains what you’re trying to convey.
Additionally: Why is personalist knowing more accurate? & how to EmBody this new way of personalist knowing in out daily lives ❤
Or not. 🤷♂️❤️
Personalist knowing? Where can I learn more about this?
@@maximosmagyar9653 Man! I talk about it a lot. I have a ton of videos on playlists in my youtube channel thing...But I'm also hard to follow because I'm not linear and very idiosyncratic. I make up all my own terms.
Apparently John Paul II was a big personalist. I love Gabriel Marcel.
As brilliant as Jonathan's symbolic insight has been, it's been long overdue in this space to hear a perspective on the subject that might provide some added depth and even a degree of counterbalance. Although in this initial conversation there is some talking past each other in order to establish respective views, it's generous of Jonathan to allow for a give and take with a newcomer into TLC when it comes to his veritable calling card. I'll be very interested to see how David's subtlety of thought works through the paradigmatic approach of Jonathan and what gems of insight come out of it to enrich and strengthen the evangelium.
Can you describe the talking past each other that you're seeing here?
@@maximosmagyar9653 to give an example, at one point David wanted to focus in on the fact that "carnivals are fun". I think this remark immediately registered with Jonathan's extensively worked-out symbolic worldview to which he offered a straightforward explanation. However, my sense was that David was looking to mutually explore the point of "fun" in greater depth. It could be that Jonathan's explanation answered David's concern, but it felt a bit like a missed opportunity.
I couldn’t quite catch the name of the person Jonathan Pageau had read on Alchemy? Does anyone know who that was?
René Guénon, I think.
Jonathan has an obsession with the vertical symbolic dimension (Peterson has it but manifested a little bit different). He puts what is up to the top as the ultimate, everything depending on the top. This creates a particular kind of symptomology, I've heard him say many times that “this world (meaning the contemporary materialistic society) is horrible”; I definitely don't want to think this about the world that I inhabit.
I've had some psychiatric issues, and I've tried to explored myself in my journey coping with this issues, I feel in my bodypsyche something off when I take this perspective to the extreme, something unhealthy. Although I consider his worldview very valuable, I'm a little bit tired of it, that's why I try to hear from him much less, same with Jordan Peterson.
Sometimes Pageau & Jonathan are both uncareful & “all over the place” with their words…
Use discernment. “Judge the wheat from the chaff.”, as we do with anyone. ❤️
In this video, Pageau says everything in the world, even your passions, all of it is good, if it is in it's proper place. Good not horrible.
Jonathan Pageau regularly speaks about the fractal nature of reality; this includes vertical symbolic thinking but it's only part of the fractal pattern he is trying to explain.
Hope that helps.
I don't think that is his position. Look for his commentary on "gnosticism", and how Christianity is different because all creation is pulled toward God through the incarnation of Christ. He often said that "everything is good in his right place", and we, as mediators between Heaven and Earth, have the responsibility to make it happen.
We live in a fallen world.
🌚☄️❤️💫
1:00:01 Grasp, left hemisphere, without a doubt
The symbol is the blueprint of the thing, the meaning of the thing, and there in the individual instantiation of the thing??
A symbol is neither solely the blueprint & meaning, nor the individual instantiation of the thing. A symbol (which etymologically means something like 'two paths merging into one') is precisely the bringing together of a blueprint and meaning into an individual, physical instantiation. It's the meeting of heaven (the incorporeal) and earth (the corporeal). That is how I understand it, at least.
@@candaniel Reminds me of the form of the Trinity.
This was amazing. Maybe my favourite pageau conversation ever. It’s up there. Now pageau needs to directly address James Lindsay’s new venture into critiquing mysticism. Because that is like the apocalypse right there 😂 I need to watch this again and take notes.
Where can I find Lindsay's criticism?
@@maximosmagyar9653 James Lindsay - who did the grievance study papers exposing some of the ridiculousness of academia and supposed "peer review" process, a kind of typical agnostic/atheist enlightenment classical liberal proponent is now discovering the links between all the critical theories, cultural marxism, post-modern stuff and gnosticism/hermeticism especially via marx and hegel who were both into hermeticism and quote hermetic stuff - hegel especially, and how this is not really philosophy or morality or good-faith dialogue, but rather a way of coopting philosophy, morality, politics, creeds, religions into a cultic process with those who are "in the know" being handed the power. Any way - he is totally convincing on the gnostic and hermetic influences on hegelian, marxist, and critical theories - but beyond that it gets muddy as he doesnt grasp religion well.
Just look him up on youtube you will start to find these critiques and he tends to lump all mysticism into this gnostic-hermetic category - perhaps simply as shorthand, but at least out of some ignorance. He makes amazing points, despite his religious ignorance.
@@maximosmagyar9653 ruclips.net/p/PLbkfdzYjae1heOsc7cXFuu4ObI0276Z8R