Great conversation. I've been dipping my toes into metamodernism trying to feel it out and this piece has finally got the hook in me. Definitely something here. Keep it up!
@BrendanGrahamDempsey
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks!
@4real277
2 жыл бұрын
This was brilliant. Seems to me McGilchrist’s conception of God in in his new epic work addresses a lot of the issues explored. Brendan, would love for you to explore his work as I personally doubt this sincere irony liminal space is enough to really integrate “blue”. It wonderfully does green and orange as it’s very Left hemisphere dominant, but lacks the “really real” RIght hemisphere post trans state I.e. “the third” that’s created in the relationship between and above the two dispositions that Mcgilchrist’s panentheistic conception permits - the oscillation creates “the third” and is created by “the third” (at the same time) constantly ad infinitum between the two hemispheres. Possibly spiralling up to who knows what? And that is “God” in a sense.
@jamesbarlow6423
2 жыл бұрын
MacGilchrist is authentic. Görtz is a monologist popularizer on the verge of crackpotitis.
@4real277
2 жыл бұрын
I get the sense Forest Landry’s work may also explore the immanent idea of God - both as a being AND a becoming at the same time - may address the fundamental weakness [in my view ] of “the sincere ironic” stance also, but i don’t have the skill right now to really follow it. Brendan please explore ...
@BrendanGrahamDempsey
2 жыл бұрын
Yes, I'm interested in Forest Landry's work. He has one of my books, I know. I'd like to explore and maybe have him on the podcast. Thanks!
@CHGLongStone
Жыл бұрын
I always feel a credibility gap when placing religion against spirituality. All religious experience has its basis in paleolithic shamanism, when it reaches a level of cultural encoding there is a bifurcation point between orthodox religion (here's a set of rules) and mystery tradition (here's a set of tools). "Spirituality" has more consistency with shamanism than it does with encoded tradition.
@metatypology
Жыл бұрын
haven’t heard the rules vs tools distinction before. thanks for sharing
@brendantannam499
2 ай бұрын
I think the bottom line for metamodern Christianity is the group of principles attributed to Christ. There is good reason to acknowledge the debt of Christianity to earlier belief systems but time and literature have managed to crystallise these principles in the modern mind. So what should we whittle the literature about Christ down to so that we extract the gold from the dross? I’m assuming the doctrine surrounding Christ is the dross. Let’s adopt ‘love your neighbour as yourself’ and abandon the ‘lake of fire’. Let’s agree to be meek and hope to inherit the earth? Maybe not! Let’s kumbaya in metamodern Christian communities or go the way of Nietzsche’s lonely uberman. I guess even Parzival was a lonely soul as he refined his soul along the road less travelled. Metamodern Christianity is open to much criticism as it ‘pretends’ to supersede the literature and liturgy of its mainstream predecessor. Some might like it as ‘the religion without religion’ and I think this concept of believers bonding around an idea that rejects bonding is where the concept falls down. Anyway, I’m going to keep my eye on this new Christianity and see what develops.
@hellucination9905
2 жыл бұрын
Negative theology is a way: God as the 'ultimative secret'. Another way is the concept of 'emptiness' of the Kyoto School of Philosophy.
@jamesbarlow6423
2 жыл бұрын
On analysis, from the standpoint of authentic transcendent experience, it's pretty clear Görtz is clueless.
@metatypology
Жыл бұрын
how so
@davidsaintjohn4248
2 жыл бұрын
I think y'all would really enjoy metanoia press.
@aryeh155
Жыл бұрын
There is Nothing, Nothing but The Absurd, G-d is The Absurd, the face of the nothing we perceive. Religion for its structure and tradition, following Good for its sake, leading where you follow. You are Nothing, the purpose formed out of absurdity, the definable yet not good.
Пікірлер: 14