Jordan Peterson Reads Cardinal Ratzinger - Qualitative Judgement And Aim - God As Judge And Redeemer
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 07. 2017
- Jordan Peterson answers my question about a sentence written by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (Introduction To Christianity 2nd Edition, Page 105).
He talks about God as both a judge and redeemer, and discusses that qualitative judgement and aim are important.
This was part of his Psychological Significance of the Biblical Stories Lecture Series (#8): Original Video: • Lecture: Biblical Seri... - Zábava
Currently reading Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger's Introduction to Christianity in my senior theology class. The text can be difficult to navigate but the profoundness of the ideas in the text are an incredible journey into trying to understand thoughts that have been lost to man over the last five hundred years.
paul fedorenko i will seatch for this book
Am reading it for the third time ...wonderful read ...needs a bit of reflection and background.
Ratzinger is one of the greatest intellects of our time
Agreed.
false, he is greatest.
probably the best theologian
Well played sir, planting him with Ratzinger. I wonder how much this is responsible for his journey towards Christianity and more precisely Catholicism
I loved your your opening salutation to JBP mate! Fine impression, solid quote and a couple of great questions!
LOL - czcams.com/video/txuWGoZF3ew/video.html - It's the most iconic hand-shake greeting in human history. I felt that it was okay to use the coarse language, because there is at least 1 classroom lecture in which Jordan uses the phrase "son of a bitch" to express anger, while telling an anecdotal story.
I think the whole interaction is brilliant. "I'm not too bad. You got a question!?" You're a legend JohnPaul!
It sounded to me like Jordan was about to say that Ratzinger hypothesized that man is "in and of itself..." good(?) or intrinsically good or enough but then Jordan jumped to state that the modern idea that one ought to accept oneself as they are, is insane etc. as though that was Ratzingers idea too. What did you make of that?
Great video by the way, thanks for posting.
It's very clear how Ratzinger describes "humanity" as being a question, specifically an unanswered question, which can only complete it's purpose by striving toward an ideal which is infinitely greater. Of course, in the eyes of Ratzinger, this abstract ideal is more "REAL" than the ground we are standing on. *(The person, in and of himself, does not possess the capacity to answer the "humanity question," and thus cannot justify his own existence from within.) Jordan is a brilliant speaker, but in this particular instance he switched gears into showing how the opposite of Ratzinger's analysis is articulated in modern thought by teaching that you should *(Accept yourself, as you are, because the abstract ideal which you yearn for is a sociological power-game construct, which does not exist.) It is explicitly NOT Ratzinger's idea that you are good enough as you are. The Great Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger is NOT a Post-Modern Neo-Marxist Radical-Left Egalitarian. Ratzinger is the 180 degrees, exact, polar opposite of "insane". Conclusion: "I want to write like Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger."
May he rest in peace. Thanks to God for his work.
Great Pope
Great one.
But why do you call him "Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger"?
It's just the de facto convention for the nomenclature of high-ranking religious prelates in the Roman Catholic Church. It would be like saying Doctor Peterson, or Jordan Doctor Peterson. That is the way his name appears on many of the books he has written.
Cardinal always does between the christian and last names.
God! These are remarkble good questions.
Bring back pope Benedict
Hi JohnPaul - Could you tell me which book that paragraph was from? I would love to read the whole thing :)
Introduction to Christianity 2nd Edition - Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger - End of Page 105.
books.google.ca/books/about/Introduction_to_Christianity.html?id=vA10DgAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y
You can read a few pages through that link to get into it. On the first page of the preface, the cardinal has this to say, "We need only to recall how little was said about the horrors of the Communist gulag, how isolated Solzhenitsyn's voice remained: No one speaks about any of that. A sort of shame forbids it; even Pol Pot's murderous regime is mentioned only occasionally in passing. But there was still disappointment and a deep-seated perplexity. People no longer trust grand moral promises, and after all, that is what Marxism had understood itself to be. It was about justice for all, about peace, about doing away with unfair master-servant relationships and so on."
It would be amazing to watch Jordan Peterson interview Pope Benedict XVI.
Read the book, it will change you.
The beginning 😂
What's the name of the book Jordan mentioned?
I wonder through which sea one strives toward this abstract ideal,this unanswerable question ? and whether the nature of that sea has any effect on the journey or outcome ?
If i am from an educated middle class background about to embark on the typical journey from college to working life and beyond and believe the world i am in to be basically meritocratic and without fundamental systemic corruption ..what effect might this have on my journey toward any choice of ideal if there is no implication for my own agency ?
If i differ from my classmate insofar as i believe the society i live in to be predicated on the exploitation inherent in the inverted totalitarianism of authoritarian capitalism,the totalitarian surveillance complex,the permanent war economy,militarised capitalism and the depredations of empire etc etc..might this have some effect on the nature and character of that journey and indeed the character of my ideal ? Should i pursue justice or should i pursue professionalism ? Should i blithely pursue a career under the false consciousness built on a century of heavily invested propaganda or act out of a sense of moral seriousness and personal agency ?
Believe that the structure of existence is not corrupt. Have faith that in the final analysis, speaking the truth in a forthright manner will make you a worthy citizen in the Kingdom of God. Don't use language to manipulate reality, but rather go forth, take risks, venture out into the unknown, and in that you will find great meaning. Be not afraid, shoulder the burden of responsible living, and do it voluntarily. Or, if you have no ambition to become a hero, then just occupy yourself by playing video games and jacking off.
Ahh,so just doctrinaire Peterson.
Remember this guy ? - www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/what-pope-benedict-knew-about-abuse-in-the-catholic-church
Life is difficult, even for a university graduate who came from a good family. The solution to your personal problems will not be found by blaming "The System". You are suffering from the pathological oversimplifications of HYPER-"critical-thinking". There is always going to be a certain degree of corruption in every social organisation, but that is an unavoidable consequence of free-will. The thing about being a kid who just got out of school is that you have not cultivated any of the expertise required to do anything about corruption. You need to clean up your room, sort yourself out, work like hell on the biggest problem you can find, and become a world-beater. Maybe then, when the pursuit of social justice comes with the penalty of having to make huge personal sacrifices, then your quest for justice will be viewed as a noble cause... Until then, you will appear to the world as a sore loser, because nobody ever offered you a good job. Boo Hoo. Perhaps I'm wrong? Show me your "merits", and I will point you in the right direction. I've got the mind of a scientist, and salon-quality hair.
PS - Cardinal Ratzinger is not a child-molester. He is a brilliant theological scholar, who was elected by his peers to run the largest religious organisation in the world. Maybe you should read one of his 68 books, before you accuse him of being corrupt.
My personal problems ? You nincompoop ! What a farcical reduction. Blaming the system ? What a tired old platitude.At what point do you think political agency should begin ? After i`m 30? After i`ve had a head full of neo-liberal indoctrination ? After ì`m working for some globalized corporation exploiting sweat shop labour?After i join the military and empire destroys another country murdering hundreds of thousands ? After i get a job on wall street and the banking industry collapses under more systemic corruption ? Such banalities.What does this mean - "You are suffering from the pathological oversimplifications of HYPER-"critical-thinking" - you`re beginning to sound like some pretentious petit bourgeois dupe who just can`t resist a flamboyant flourish.
Sore loser ? have you any idea how ideological that trite little banality is ??
Did i call Ratz a paedophile ? Here`s that moral judgement again - www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/what-pope-benedict-knew-about-abuse-in-the-catholic-church .." Maybe you should read one of his 68 books, before you accuse him of being corrupt." - This is really silly.Does his scholarly work preclude him from moral judgement ??
Forget about the banks and big corporations, do not subscribe to an ideology, make sure to vote when there is a general election, and the military does not need another pusillanimous Section 8, so remain a civilian. It is so easy to criticise people and organisations, when they have already rejected you.
My advice is this: Study MATHEMATICS, study HARD SCIENCE, study COMPUTER SCIENCE, study PUBLIC SPEAKING. First, you need to become an expert. Then, invent something which makes the world a better place. Build a company of hard working people around your new invention, and sell it to as many customers as you can. Now you are a BOSS-PLAYER. After having achieved this milestone, you can choose to become an agent of political change. It will be an admirable personal sacrifice, as opposed to an emotionally charged hissy-fit. You are just throwing an hysterical tirade, because you are confused and unsuccessful.
A moral judgement is only valid if you've done your homework. It is INSANE to preclude that the moral judgements of Alexander Stille are sufficient to summarily discredit the entire catalogue of the world's most decorated scholar. Especially when you were too lazy to read any of Cardinal Ratzinger's 68 books for yourself.
Why are you criticising me? I'm the only friend you've got out here.
Um... That guy should clean his room, rearrange it, give away his possessions, paint it, clean it again, and never use the phrase son of a bitch until he has the cleanest room of rooms in Plato's world of ideas
They talk about the 10% of the human population who you and I are in.they have the luxury to question such ideas.really the bottom line is the underprivileged preaching to the less fortunate
Considering Ratzinger is quoting Nietzsche, what a banal and verbose way to say man seeks progress. Why anyone would aspire to write like Ratzinger baffles me.. perhaps it's some attempt to grasp at words that speak to the human nature but sometimes you just have to spit it out
You know who else quotes Nietzsche? JORDAN PETERSON. Precise language, word selection, narrative structure, clear thinking, and the ability to elicit an emotional response... This is not an insurance policy, it is a literary work of art. Both myself and Jordan Peterson, we both like art. Art is not something which you can just "spit out".
JohnPaul Adamovsky I meant that Nietzsche is incredibly precise with his language, "he writes what others write in a book in 10 sentences". Ratzinger writes one sentence in 10 sentences. That being said, I'm a fan of comedy where one extraneous syllable could ruin the whole bit.
JohnPaul Adamovsky Try reading Durkheim and then reading Piaget, Piaget is a breath of fresh air.
etagged With respect (because I’m not trying to spark any rage on this comment) I am wondering whether you ever read Ratzinger? If not, I would encourage you to (whether you agree with him or not on the subject you read) because I think you’ll find that he writes with incredible clarity, precision and beauty much like Nietzsche (whether you agree with him or not on the subject you read).