3 ms·
Right now I’d classify it as both “a fairly good read” and “an earnest attempt at good old fashioned philosophy”. It’s clearly trying to recapture a more posit
by breckinloggins 6y ago
Right now I’d classify it as both “a fairly good read” and “an earnest attempt at good old fashioned philosophy”.
It’s clearly trying to recapture a more positive philosophical mood as a bit of an antidote to the current trend of deconstruction. But whether it is a true and useful return to the pursuit of the “good life” or a naive attempt to cast aside the perils of grand narratives to return uselessly to a simpler time is, of course, a subjective opinion.
I’m rather sentimental myself and I believe a lot has been lost with today’s cynical postmodern-inspired philosophical trends, but I imagine those who think the work of deconstructing colonializing narratives that only soothe the already mostly comfortable is not yet complete are experiencing profound eye rolling whenever this stuff shows up on HN.
- Zeminary 6y agoI feel the same. Do you know of anyone else doing anything similar in the space?
- breckinloggins 6y agoSome other folks who are adjacent to this effort, roughly: - https://waitbutwhy.com https://waitbutwhy.com - https://www.ribbonfarm.com https://www.ribbonfarm.com You could also put folks like Jordan Peterson in this bucket, but IMO he seems more interested in resurrecting (pun intended) Christianity in modern form rather than exploring entirely new frames.
- klik99 6y agoI'm not sure Jordan Peterson is trying resurrect Christianity, but maybe he's trying to resurrect Jung. He uses myths to understand collective unconscious (which is the really interesting part of his work) and then uses those metaphors on an ad-hoc basis to infer biological truisms with the goal of making people psychologically well-adjusted (which is where he swims in the crazy pool)