Know your place…below my feet

I have resigned myself to the fact that I am going to have to produce a Plinkett-style video explaining that Carl Jung being a shitty person *does not* preclude him from being a genius–he was not only a bona-fide genius, but perhaps one of the more significant ones of the first half of the previous century; in my opinion the only person who approaches Jung in terms of contributions to psychology is Freud.

Satan was the strongest, fastest, smartest, most gifted, most talented angel in heaven–and also a shitty person.

Mind you this video will probably have to come after the one where I nuke the Denisovan-Unified-Mound-Building theory.

Comment on: Cultural psychotherapy, mass countertransference, and Jordan Peterson

Obadiah makes a logical error here by thinking I could be wrong about this. I’m not saying anything, I’m just saying I have these mystical vision quests and there’s nothing he can criticize about the pure truths that gush forth from my wordhole.


That’s why he’ll stay in the comments, where he belongs. That and he’s scared of criticizing my ideas because he can’t even imagine where he’d start.



About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Know your place…below my feet

  1. Mycroft Jones says:

    Even if Jung was a genius, did he package any of it in a way that was transmitted forward for the benefit of future generations? If not, he was the mental equivalent of a world champion masturbator.

  2. Julian says:

    >That’s why he’ll stay in the comments, where he belongs. That and he’s scared of criticizing my ideas because he can’t even imagine where he’d start.

    Don’t take the bait. He wants you to challenge him intellectually because he’s too scared to fight you in the streets.

  3. Obadiah says:

    Conjecture delivered as gospel makes Enki a triggered boy, but when the conjecture is also incorrect is when the Plinkett vids start happening.

  4. Obadiah says:

    Lol btw

  5. Obadiah says:

    Our problem is and has been that I am overly-tuned to the external, present, exogenous, objective situation while you are overly-tuned to the internal, eternal, endogenous, subjective meaning of events.

    The eternal, internal meaning of events needs badly to reconnect with the external, present, objective situation.

  6. Obadiah says:

    If I weren’t being critical and just fellated you it would not only be dishonest on my part but also counterproductive to the deeper underlying truth of your inner vision being able to reach people, which it needs to.

  7. Obadiah says:

    I think our disagreement about Jung is really a disagreement about what the deeper definition of “genius” is–to me, Jung was a genius by every definition simply because of how much ground he broke and his huge contributions to psychology–in my mind, his many and unfortunate moral failings do not affect the fact that he was a genius. He was a genius with major dark triad traits.

    Whereas to you, Jung cannot be a genius because of said dark triad traits.

    So our actual disagreement here is what the definition of “genius” is.

    I think genius is where art and thought combine to bear fruit.

    Because the quality of art depends at least partially on a person’s subjective experience, so too will each person’s definition of genius depend at least partially on their subjective evaluation.

  8. Obadiah says:

    Jung bore a lot of good fruit with his early, purely psychological work (which in my opinion has major Edenic implications).

    Jung bore more and more bad and damaging fruit the later and deeper he got into his career and the more and more enamored he got with gnosticism/mysticism/witchcraft/luciferianism

  9. Obadiah says:

    So our paradox here is that the deeper message of your inner vision needs to reach external reality but your method of thinking keeps this from happening, while my cognitive suite can reach people but needs to stay in touch with the deeper message of your inner vision.

  10. Aeoli Pera says:

    You know I agree with you 100% on Jung, don’t you? And I’m on board with what you’re saying here, even if I don’t think I’m so detached from reality as you claim.

  11. Aeoli Pera says:

    You won’t find me saying anywhere that Jung is not a genius. On the contrary, I contrasted him with Peterson’s conspicuous non-genius IIRC. (Or was that just on podcasts and Discord? Hmm.)

    Anyway, let me know when you’re ready to meet me in da streetz. Don’t bother wearing your gi, krotty boy, we fight mean and dirty, I see red and GO CRAZY bro.

  12. Aeoli Pera says:

    Also, tell me your weak spots so I can trigger you into making videos.

  13. Patrick says:

    This is, I believe, the true ReviewBrah position on the matter.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s