I can't say I can agree with your conclusion there. Deconstruction is more or less a philosophical idea of taking a held belief and breaking it down to it's components to explore potential ambiguities, contradictions and biases among other lines of thought to either further your conviction of the belief or lessen it. Beliefs also aren't something you can just choose to have either. You either believe something or you don't. You can also have good evidence for a belief or practically no evidence for a belief but you can't just simply choose to believe in something, you have to become convinced that a proposition is indeed the case. I personally do my best to try and follow good reasoning for the beliefs of anything that I have with evidence, though what people consider good enough evidence for any particular idea changes from person to person. That's why there is often a differentiation between belief and knowledge with knowledge being the well justified true belief. The hard part about beliefs and the bible, though, is that so much of it is about interpretation. So You have one set of text, yet many different interpretations of that same text. Of course the Bible isn't the only thing like that either, but in this case, it's more pertinent. I do prefer the idea of progressive Christianity over conservative Christianity though, so I can at least appreciate that even if I don't hold the same belief of the religion itself.
"I'm a deep skeptic and a pastor" Yeah, let me press the biggest X I can find. There's two kinds of pastors: The ones who know it's a scam and just want to stay employed and the ones who are naive enough to actually believe in the christian myth.
I don't know why you would come to the conclusion that deconstruction isn't a thing simply because there is no discrete end point. I've always thought of deconstruction and reconstruction as ongoing processes. This seems like a red herring, like you've emphasized the idea that there has to be a discrete end point for deconstruction to be a thing, when there is no reason it has to be that way.
His paycheck depends on people not thinking this whole christianity thing through. Of course he will tell them they should let themselves be brainwashed by an echo chamber.
That's actually the one thing he is right about. Beliefs aren't formed through a conscious process. They are the sum of our knowledge and convictions. Deconstruction doesn't form beliefs per se, it examines the foundation they rest upon. That's the part he doesn't understand. Or rather the part he has to "misunderstand".
I don't think this is necessarily consistent with the way that people use "deconstruction" in a religious context. Like the broader philosophical concept which lent the term to the act of questioning one's faith, "deconstruction" usually seems like an open-ended process wherein people are freed to accept or reject religious practices based on whether they truly resonate with the person engaging in deconstruction (rather than merely accepting practices based on social pressures and past experiences) So pretty much exactly what you describe as the preferred alternative
The bible is pro-choice in the sense that women can be brought before a priest and he can decide whether her pregnancy shall be terminated. So it's a your body, my choice sorta thing (Numbers 5:11-31). Also, the bible does condemn homosexuality in several passages, principally Leviticus 18:22. While I do think it's useful in some ways for liberal Christians to cherrypick the bible and screen out the ugly parts, it's also very dishonest, and it sets you up for ridicule when someone you're talking to happens to know literally anything about the bible.
My understanding is that it's about questioning and taking a fresh look at your own beliefs. It is absolutely a thing that exists and everyone should do it. It doesn't have a set end goal though, it's entirely possible to go through deconstruction and still maintain the same beliefs as before. If you have good reasons for believing what you believe then it should just make your beliefs even stronger. EDIT: I get what Jeremy is saying though. It's not necessarily a process you just go through once and you're done. That I definitely agree with.
@jful I like the fact that he walked through a thought process to the idea. Deconstructing deconstructionism...lol It made me wonder if I understood the Idea. I still haven't read, and at the moment forgot, the good writers on it. But from what I remember it too has it's ancient roots. It keeps reminding me of Socrates off the bat. Getting to the Base Ideas is how I understood it. I am both happy and sad to learn this video is basically a commercial for his group. Because it sounds like his group does goes into philosophical ideas. But it makes me Trust him even less in many more ways... LMAO
@IsraelLazoPlus Most people's beliefs aren't well founded. Especially the vast majority of Christians. That was Socrates concern as well when he came up with trying to find the most basic element or the purest forms. But deconstructing down to the simplistic parts is supposed to help you identify if your idea has virtue, or if you actually believe something.
@@IsraelLazoPlus Exactly this. His "solution" is to seek help from a christian community - aka to seal yourself inside a christian echo chamber. It's so damn transparent, too.
I don't really agree. Life is continuous, but like water, it forms distinct waves, and those waves have distinct crests. People will undergo deconstructive analysis many times throughout their life, but they'll do so in identifiable phrases as they find new aspects to analyse and complete those analyses to a degree whereby their cognitive dissonance is resolved. And community is definitely not the right way to figure out your beliefs. That unavoidably leaves you influenced by other people's beliefs. We think alone, so we must analyse our thoughts alone. The buddhists honestly got that aspect of life spot on.
I think your characterization of deconstruction and reconstruction is incomplete- however, it will get people to click, and the advice you packaged here is very practical and direct, and more people need to hear it. So thank you.
I can't say I can agree with your conclusion there. Deconstruction is more or less a philosophical idea of taking a held belief and breaking it down to it's components to explore potential ambiguities, contradictions and biases among other lines of thought to either further your conviction of the belief or lessen it.
Beliefs also aren't something you can just choose to have either. You either believe something or you don't. You can also have good evidence for a belief or practically no evidence for a belief but you can't just simply choose to believe in something, you have to become convinced that a proposition is indeed the case.
I personally do my best to try and follow good reasoning for the beliefs of anything that I have with evidence, though what people consider good enough evidence for any particular idea changes from person to person. That's why there is often a differentiation between belief and knowledge with knowledge being the well justified true belief.
The hard part about beliefs and the bible, though, is that so much of it is about interpretation. So You have one set of text, yet many different interpretations of that same text. Of course the Bible isn't the only thing like that either, but in this case, it's more pertinent.
I do prefer the idea of progressive Christianity over conservative Christianity though, so I can at least appreciate that even if I don't hold the same belief of the religion itself.
I wanted to comment, but yours sums up my thoughts. Very well put.
"I'm a deep skeptic and a pastor"
Yeah, let me press the biggest X I can find. There's two kinds of pastors: The ones who know it's a scam and just want to stay employed and the ones who are naive enough to actually believe in the christian myth.
amen
I don't know why you would come to the conclusion that deconstruction isn't a thing simply because there is no discrete end point. I've always thought of deconstruction and reconstruction as ongoing processes. This seems like a red herring, like you've emphasized the idea that there has to be a discrete end point for deconstruction to be a thing, when there is no reason it has to be that way.
His paycheck depends on people not thinking this whole christianity thing through. Of course he will tell them they should let themselves be brainwashed by an echo chamber.
what's this dude even on about, when he said "you never had the ability to form a belief" Ii realized even he wasnt sure what he was talking about
That’s what I was wondering. It started to sound like word-salad pretty quick to my ears.
@Plague857 I think he's just trying to gaslight deconstructing ex Christians or something like that, trying to say they were never really christian
That's actually the one thing he is right about. Beliefs aren't formed through a conscious process. They are the sum of our knowledge and convictions. Deconstruction doesn't form beliefs per se, it examines the foundation they rest upon. That's the part he doesn't understand. Or rather the part he has to "misunderstand".
I don't think this is necessarily consistent with the way that people use "deconstruction" in a religious context. Like the broader philosophical concept which lent the term to the act of questioning one's faith, "deconstruction" usually seems like an open-ended process wherein people are freed to accept or reject religious practices based on whether they truly resonate with the person engaging in deconstruction (rather than merely accepting practices based on social pressures and past experiences)
So pretty much exactly what you describe as the preferred alternative
The bible is pro-choice in the sense that women can be brought before a priest and he can decide whether her pregnancy shall be terminated. So it's a your body, my choice sorta thing (Numbers 5:11-31).
Also, the bible does condemn homosexuality in several passages, principally Leviticus 18:22.
While I do think it's useful in some ways for liberal Christians to cherrypick the bible and screen out the ugly parts, it's also very dishonest, and it sets you up for ridicule when someone you're talking to happens to know literally anything about the bible.
Isn't deconstruction the attempt to get to the basics, the simplistic versions of a belief?
My understanding is that it's about questioning and taking a fresh look at your own beliefs. It is absolutely a thing that exists and everyone should do it.
It doesn't have a set end goal though, it's entirely possible to go through deconstruction and still maintain the same beliefs as before. If you have good reasons for believing what you believe then it should just make your beliefs even stronger.
EDIT: I get what Jeremy is saying though. It's not necessarily a process you just go through once and you're done. That I definitely agree with.
@jful
I like the fact that he walked through a thought process to the idea. Deconstructing deconstructionism...lol
It made me wonder if I understood the Idea. I still haven't read, and at the moment forgot, the good writers on it. But from what I remember it too has it's ancient roots. It keeps reminding me of Socrates off the bat. Getting to the Base Ideas is how I understood it.
I am both happy and sad to learn this video is basically a commercial for his group. Because it sounds like his group does goes into philosophical ideas. But it makes me Trust him even less in many more ways... LMAO
This author is just convinced that people's beliefs are not well founded, and he is afraid that people will realize that, specially young people.
@IsraelLazoPlus
Most people's beliefs aren't well founded.
Especially the vast majority of Christians.
That was Socrates concern as well when he came up with trying to find the most basic element or the purest forms.
But deconstructing down to the simplistic parts is supposed to help you identify if your idea has virtue, or if you actually believe something.
@@IsraelLazoPlus Exactly this. His "solution" is to seek help from a christian community - aka to seal yourself inside a christian echo chamber. It's so damn transparent, too.
I don't really agree. Life is continuous, but like water, it forms distinct waves, and those waves have distinct crests. People will undergo deconstructive analysis many times throughout their life, but they'll do so in identifiable phrases as they find new aspects to analyse and complete those analyses to a degree whereby their cognitive dissonance is resolved.
And community is definitely not the right way to figure out your beliefs. That unavoidably leaves you influenced by other people's beliefs. We think alone, so we must analyse our thoughts alone. The buddhists honestly got that aspect of life spot on.
this is pedantic
While I agree with your broader point, I still think that deconstruction can be a useful term
I think your characterization of deconstruction and reconstruction is incomplete- however, it will get people to click, and the advice you packaged here is very practical and direct, and more people need to hear it. So thank you.