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.
-Obadiah
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.
:DDD
Aeoli Pera 
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.
:-O
>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.
Conjecture delivered as gospel makes Enki a triggered boy, but when the conjecture is also incorrect is when the Plinkett vids start happening.
Lol btw
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
Also, tell me your weak spots so I can trigger you into making videos.
This is, I believe, the true ReviewBrah position on the matter.
If Plato understood that everyone is fighting a battle, Jung understood that everyone is taking a journey. Tolkien also understood this on some level, but expressed it through artistic rather than intellectually-articulated means.
You and Bruce Charlton kind of grok this; you kind of understand it–but only for one specific type of journey.
>Also, tell me your weak spots so I can trigger you into making videos.
Just keep doing the thing where you make posts on the internet.
>If Plato understood that everyone is fighting a battle, Jung understood that everyone is taking a journey
Not to say that everyone is a particularly good person, or that their journey is going to take them to a particularly good place.