Is Peterson right and we can't escape certain stories?

>>9437873
I don't think so. In the modern day, we like to think of ourselves as progressing as a society, but I think it's much more likely we have always been like this, and only our technology and knowledge has progressed. We cannot transcend those myths because transcending is inherently inhuman.

>>9437873
kill yourself

>>9437873
If you believe Jung, then myths are an innate part of out psyche. They are ancestral memories which we all inherit, so it's no surprise that they keep emerging in unconnected cultures.

File: stay_classy_4.png (461KB, 500x368px) Image search: [Google]

461KB, 500x368px

>>9437878
Fucking autist.

File: Yukio_Mishima.jpg (97KB, 449x364px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 449x364px

Even if we tried, which we are, to, for example, go beyond the Father-Mother structure, this will result in us, the culture trying to transcend the innate mythical stucture, being replaced or forced to submit by one with an intact mythical structure.
I won't harp on about birthrates or immigration statistics, but there certainly is a certain dynamism and robustness that comes with a culture fully embodying it's mythical/cultural, archetypical structure. See China, India, or parts of the Islamic World.

Peterson thinks of myth in terms of psychological archetypes, right?
There should be some ez arguments to challenge this

>>9437905
>I won't harp on about birthrates or immigration statistics, but there certainly is a certain dynamism and robustness that comes with a culture fully embodying it's mythical/cultural, archetypical structure. See China, India, or parts of the Islamic World.

could you talk more on this subject? seems very interesting tbqh anon.

File: C Jung and J Campbell.jpg (27KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 480x360px

>>9437873
>Is Peterson right and we can't escape certain stories? Are tellings like flood myths real in some sort and able to regenerate themselves so that independent cultures cook them up?

Do you really think Peterson came up with this? Jung was writing about this 100 years ago.

This is what happens when you get all you 'education' from YouTube videos.

I don't know much about Peterson's argument on this but it sounds like the same one as Campbell's and Frazers which, while they're great and all, seem to forget that they're just being reductionist and if you reduce anything enough they all look the same. If they come up with 6 archetypal stories, those stories could be divided up into 2 different versions each and then we'd have 12 archetypes, no less "real" than that. Or we can reduce the six into "something happened", the most basic story of all. Is it worth getting excited about that idea? No.

>>9437873
>>9437898
>>9438406
>>9438409

Peterson is explicitly indebted to Jung and Campbell, and mentions them often. In this interpretation, especially with Jung, these myths cannot be escaped.

Nietzsche, on the other hand, I believe would say that we would be able to overcome these structures: >>9437877
But Jung thought that if such a thing would be possible, Nietzsche had done it, and that is what drove him into insanity (more correctly, overcoming the Apollonian project).

>>9437905
The notion of overcoming is certainly predominately Western, but to overcome these myths one must first embody them perfectly, causing that dynamism and robustness of which you speak.

>>9438406
>Autist is mad because OP pursued a different form of education than himself

>>9439033
no, he is right. you should give credit to original author. you can tell where you've heard it from and cite from there but you should explicitly say that it is jungian etc. dont get mad at people for no reason. dont be insecure because you learn from youtube, most universities are shit anyway.

>>9439055
Nah, he's just pissed because some anon that watches JBP dares ask a question on a board that covers this exact field of study. Regardless of citation accuracy.

Peterson, for some reaosn, makes fags mad on this board, i don't understand why.

>>9439096
i do not lurk much but considering only that post i would oppose this. still he is right in his argument though and despite you might also be right in yours.
also my post sounds fagish for some reason.

File: -hungry-jpg-1600-900.jpg (170KB, 1600x676px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 1600x676px

OP here,

I don't care if it's Jung of Petersons idea. I'm interested in the idea.
And since I've watched at least 6 Peterson lectures or so and Peterson mentions Jung every 10 minutes, I'm well aware that he's not the source of everything to do with myths.

Obviously Peterson stumbled into a culture war and isn't ashamed to profit (in form of money but also audience gathering) from his status. But him being liked by the right should not be a fucking argument for all the leftists that simply try to dismiss everything he says because they don't like him. Memes aren't inherently bad.
I don't care about this shit.

I've also like this guys 300 videos on Nietzsche

https://youtu.be/soT-kZHBTlE

which are lower video quality and he never gained an audience - but with a Peterson who's known due to politics and memes at least we can discuss this stuff an there's a chance people saw the content.

>>9438707
>But Jung thought that if such a thing would be possible, Nietzsche had done it, and that is what drove him into insanity (more correctly, overcoming the Apollonian project).
Fuck off. Jung and Freud owe EVERYTHING to Schopenhauer and (especially Nietzsche). Everything that isn't full of pseud garbage, with sex obsessions and myth obsessions.

And what do they get in return?, syphilis and brothel SLANDER:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18575181

>>9439811
Let's take the mother, father and child archetypes.
Try not to have children or reject the human universal that is marriage, your genes then will probably not last more than one or two generations.

>>9437905
This is why literature is important. Good writing breaths new life into myths, and the current trend of hyper-skepticism and irony in art will lead to the demise of the West, unless we do something about it.