Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Understanding European psychology
6 views
Skip to first unread message
M Winther
May 9, 2012, 11:55:29 AM5/9/12
to
Time and again, the argument is brought forth that the Middle Ages
represents darkness, while the Enlightenment represents a freeing of
the mind from its imprisonment in church dogmas, etc. I am tired of
hearing this argument. In fact, the Middle Ages is the egg from which
the Enlightenment hatched. Medieval times is the Mother of the
Enlightenment, not its antagonist. It is the introverted standpoint of
the Middle Ages that has fostered our 'inner locus of control', a
capacity often lacking in non-European ethnicities.
http://tinyurl.com/6aqyv4y
Medieval people fostered their souls and mind. They were more
interested in the spirit and less interested in worldly matters. This
has given to us our supreme capacity of focusing our minds, our
self-control, and our capacity to withstand impulses. We are still
very interested in the intellectual, the systematic, the conceptual,
like no other people on earth, especially not Third World people. This
is why we are here discussing intellectual matters, much like the
disputations of medieval scholastics and monks. They gave us this
ability. It was their work on their souls, and their work in
philosophy, theology, science and medicine, that gave rise to the
Enlightenment. It did not drop down on earth from out of the blue.
Enlightenment came about as the fruit of a long development.
During antiquity, a portion of the people were quite advanced, while
the populace had a primitive worldview, and were quite superstitious.
On average, I think the antique dweller had a decidedly lower
conscious level than the medieval dweller. Just because there were
brilliant philosophers, doctors, and engineers in ancient antiquity,
doesn't mean that this knowledge belonged to everyone. In the Middle
Ages knowledge was better distributed, and they certainly knew that
the earth is round. It is an illusion that modern society would have
come about faster if it weren't for the Middle Ages. Modern Europeans
are shaped by both the Middle Ages and classical antiquity. I think we
are much different from the antique dweller. On the surface we are
similar, but on the inside, modern Europeans have a medieval frame of
mind.
So what is the origin of the modern myth that Christianity and the
Middle Ages have stood in stark opposition to science and development?
Historians of science David Lindberg and Ronald Numbers say that two
works from the 19th century are responsible for many of the
misconceptions, namely John William Draper, "History of the Conflict
between Religion and Science" (1876) and Andrew Dickson White, "A
History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom"
(1896). Draper is responsible for the notorious disinformation that
medievals thought the earth was flat. These authors created the
metaphor of war between science and faith, and many of the
misconceptions that propagate to this day. Witch-hunting is
predominantly a pre-medieval and post-medieval phenomenon.
Nevertheless, the notion of witch-hunts sticks to the Middle Ages as
glue.
Copernicus, Kepler and Galileo were indebted to medieval scientists
like Jean Buridan (1300-1360), William Heytesbury (ca. 1313-1372),
Nikolas Oersme (dead 1382), and Nicolaus of Cusa (1401-1464). Galileo,
who was a believing Christian, did not oppose Christianity or the
church. He criticized the theories of the earliest scientist, namely
Aristotle. Many keystones of modern science were created during
medieval times, such as Heytesbury's description of accelerating
objects and Buridan's impetus theory on movement. Important inventions
made life easier, which increased productivity and improved the
standards of living, such as the iron plough, spectacles, and the
horse shoe.
Historian of science, James Hannam, argues that the Middle Ages
provided the foundation of modern science. The university, a medieval
invention, played an important role. So did belief in a rational and
faithful God who had created laws of nature that didn't change
erratically, and which it was possible to study. That's why the church
has always supported the study of nature. By studying God's creation
we learn about God's thoughts. Even Einstein was fond of this notion.
So the ardent belief in laws of nature derives from Christian theology
and its view of God and creation. What is not generally known is that
the Big Bang theory was invented by theorists at the Vatican. They
tried to convince Einstein of its validity, who rejected the theory
out of hand, until empirical evidence proved it correct (Edwin
Hubble's discovery of an expanding universe).
The Japanese Middle Ages was no less introverted than the European, to
the effect that a garden with a few stones and gravel, or the serving
of a cup of tea, could be experienced as sensational. Accordingly, the
Japanese have learnt to focus their minds and to exercise self-control
to the utmost. Japanese have a tendency of working themselves to
death, a phenomenon known as 'Karoshi'. The Japanese held out as long
as possible against modernity. Still today, many Japanese remain true
to the medieval traditions. Paradoxically, many Westerners think that
this aspect is the only interesting thing about Japan. So why are they
so contemptuous about European Middle Ages? I suppose it has to with
indoctrination and the ceaselessly repeated story about Galileo
versus the oppressive Catholic church. Interestingly, the English,
much like the Japanese, experience the serving of a cup of tea as
perfectly sensational, which underpins my thesis that they are like
introverted medievals inside. The English also devote a lot of time to
gardening.
The notorious underestimation of the Middle Ages depends on the fact
that we are repressing the inner medieval aspect of ourselves. We do
not want to admit that we are medievals inside. Westerners wish to
adjust to modern ideals of materialistic advancement and success, to
say yes to innovation, space exploration, and all that. That's why I
always get to hear this appraisal of the glorious Enlightenment and
all the "good things" that it has brought us. Communism, Nazism,
catastrophes like Holocaust, the World Wars, deforestation, etc., are
conveniently forgotten.
Our civilisation has opted for a collective neurosis that builds on
the repression of feeling. We aim to be rational in all quarters of
life. We follow principles instead of listening to our heart. Canadian
author John Ralston Saul says that society today suffers from a
conflict between democracy as an institution, and "rational"
government. Modern rationalism has been reduced to a system of
management and administration, but it is at bottom incapable of
guiding human affairs. This is something that David Brooks has noted,
too: http://www.ted.com/talks/david_brooks_the_social_animal.html
The acute economical crises that have befallen us, since Saul wrote
this, are facts that bolster his argument. It is becoming more and
more evident that politicians are subordinated to the "market forces".
Modern rationalism throws a very long shadow. Political ideologies,
Fascism, Communism, and Nazism, is modernity wreaking havoc. I think
it represents an amputation of the medieval mind-set, with a resultant
regress to an antique frame of mind. It means the reawakening of
Imperium Romanum. So it came to pass what all the modern proponents of
the antique ideals always have wished, namely the reawakening of
ancient antiquity and its marble statues, its ideals of power and
beauty. Out through the window went the medieval ideals of
interiority, and all the Christian virtues. It is modernity that
provokes this development, by its constant hammering of all the
medieval virtues in our psychology and in history.
References
Hannam, J. (2011). The Genesis of Science: How the Christian Middle
Ages Launched the Scientific Revolution.
Lindberg,D. & Numbers, R. (1986). God and Nature - Historical essays
on the encounter between Christianity and Science.
Lindberg, D. Galileo (2009). Galileo Goes to Jail and Other Myths
about Science and Religion.
Saul, J. R. (1993). Voltaire's Bastards: The Dictatorship of Reason in
the West.
Draper, J. W, (1896). History of the Conflict between Religion and
Science.
White, A. D. (1896). A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology
in Christendom.
Mats Winther
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/
represents darkness, while the Enlightenment represents a freeing of
the mind from its imprisonment in church dogmas, etc. I am tired of
hearing this argument. In fact, the Middle Ages is the egg from which
the Enlightenment hatched. Medieval times is the Mother of the
Enlightenment, not its antagonist. It is the introverted standpoint of
the Middle Ages that has fostered our 'inner locus of control', a
capacity often lacking in non-European ethnicities.
http://tinyurl.com/6aqyv4y
Medieval people fostered their souls and mind. They were more
interested in the spirit and less interested in worldly matters. This
has given to us our supreme capacity of focusing our minds, our
self-control, and our capacity to withstand impulses. We are still
very interested in the intellectual, the systematic, the conceptual,
like no other people on earth, especially not Third World people. This
is why we are here discussing intellectual matters, much like the
disputations of medieval scholastics and monks. They gave us this
ability. It was their work on their souls, and their work in
philosophy, theology, science and medicine, that gave rise to the
Enlightenment. It did not drop down on earth from out of the blue.
Enlightenment came about as the fruit of a long development.
During antiquity, a portion of the people were quite advanced, while
the populace had a primitive worldview, and were quite superstitious.
On average, I think the antique dweller had a decidedly lower
conscious level than the medieval dweller. Just because there were
brilliant philosophers, doctors, and engineers in ancient antiquity,
doesn't mean that this knowledge belonged to everyone. In the Middle
Ages knowledge was better distributed, and they certainly knew that
the earth is round. It is an illusion that modern society would have
come about faster if it weren't for the Middle Ages. Modern Europeans
are shaped by both the Middle Ages and classical antiquity. I think we
are much different from the antique dweller. On the surface we are
similar, but on the inside, modern Europeans have a medieval frame of
mind.
So what is the origin of the modern myth that Christianity and the
Middle Ages have stood in stark opposition to science and development?
Historians of science David Lindberg and Ronald Numbers say that two
works from the 19th century are responsible for many of the
misconceptions, namely John William Draper, "History of the Conflict
between Religion and Science" (1876) and Andrew Dickson White, "A
History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom"
(1896). Draper is responsible for the notorious disinformation that
medievals thought the earth was flat. These authors created the
metaphor of war between science and faith, and many of the
misconceptions that propagate to this day. Witch-hunting is
predominantly a pre-medieval and post-medieval phenomenon.
Nevertheless, the notion of witch-hunts sticks to the Middle Ages as
glue.
Copernicus, Kepler and Galileo were indebted to medieval scientists
like Jean Buridan (1300-1360), William Heytesbury (ca. 1313-1372),
Nikolas Oersme (dead 1382), and Nicolaus of Cusa (1401-1464). Galileo,
who was a believing Christian, did not oppose Christianity or the
church. He criticized the theories of the earliest scientist, namely
Aristotle. Many keystones of modern science were created during
medieval times, such as Heytesbury's description of accelerating
objects and Buridan's impetus theory on movement. Important inventions
made life easier, which increased productivity and improved the
standards of living, such as the iron plough, spectacles, and the
horse shoe.
Historian of science, James Hannam, argues that the Middle Ages
provided the foundation of modern science. The university, a medieval
invention, played an important role. So did belief in a rational and
faithful God who had created laws of nature that didn't change
erratically, and which it was possible to study. That's why the church
has always supported the study of nature. By studying God's creation
we learn about God's thoughts. Even Einstein was fond of this notion.
So the ardent belief in laws of nature derives from Christian theology
and its view of God and creation. What is not generally known is that
the Big Bang theory was invented by theorists at the Vatican. They
tried to convince Einstein of its validity, who rejected the theory
out of hand, until empirical evidence proved it correct (Edwin
Hubble's discovery of an expanding universe).
The Japanese Middle Ages was no less introverted than the European, to
the effect that a garden with a few stones and gravel, or the serving
of a cup of tea, could be experienced as sensational. Accordingly, the
Japanese have learnt to focus their minds and to exercise self-control
to the utmost. Japanese have a tendency of working themselves to
death, a phenomenon known as 'Karoshi'. The Japanese held out as long
as possible against modernity. Still today, many Japanese remain true
to the medieval traditions. Paradoxically, many Westerners think that
this aspect is the only interesting thing about Japan. So why are they
so contemptuous about European Middle Ages? I suppose it has to with
indoctrination and the ceaselessly repeated story about Galileo
versus the oppressive Catholic church. Interestingly, the English,
much like the Japanese, experience the serving of a cup of tea as
perfectly sensational, which underpins my thesis that they are like
introverted medievals inside. The English also devote a lot of time to
gardening.
The notorious underestimation of the Middle Ages depends on the fact
that we are repressing the inner medieval aspect of ourselves. We do
not want to admit that we are medievals inside. Westerners wish to
adjust to modern ideals of materialistic advancement and success, to
say yes to innovation, space exploration, and all that. That's why I
always get to hear this appraisal of the glorious Enlightenment and
all the "good things" that it has brought us. Communism, Nazism,
catastrophes like Holocaust, the World Wars, deforestation, etc., are
conveniently forgotten.
Our civilisation has opted for a collective neurosis that builds on
the repression of feeling. We aim to be rational in all quarters of
life. We follow principles instead of listening to our heart. Canadian
author John Ralston Saul says that society today suffers from a
conflict between democracy as an institution, and "rational"
government. Modern rationalism has been reduced to a system of
management and administration, but it is at bottom incapable of
guiding human affairs. This is something that David Brooks has noted,
too: http://www.ted.com/talks/david_brooks_the_social_animal.html
The acute economical crises that have befallen us, since Saul wrote
this, are facts that bolster his argument. It is becoming more and
more evident that politicians are subordinated to the "market forces".
Modern rationalism throws a very long shadow. Political ideologies,
Fascism, Communism, and Nazism, is modernity wreaking havoc. I think
it represents an amputation of the medieval mind-set, with a resultant
regress to an antique frame of mind. It means the reawakening of
Imperium Romanum. So it came to pass what all the modern proponents of
the antique ideals always have wished, namely the reawakening of
ancient antiquity and its marble statues, its ideals of power and
beauty. Out through the window went the medieval ideals of
interiority, and all the Christian virtues. It is modernity that
provokes this development, by its constant hammering of all the
medieval virtues in our psychology and in history.
References
Hannam, J. (2011). The Genesis of Science: How the Christian Middle
Ages Launched the Scientific Revolution.
Lindberg,D. & Numbers, R. (1986). God and Nature - Historical essays
on the encounter between Christianity and Science.
Lindberg, D. Galileo (2009). Galileo Goes to Jail and Other Myths
about Science and Religion.
Saul, J. R. (1993). Voltaire's Bastards: The Dictatorship of Reason in
the West.
Draper, J. W, (1896). History of the Conflict between Religion and
Science.
White, A. D. (1896). A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology
in Christendom.
Mats Winther
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/
Garret K
May 12, 2012, 3:13:54 PM5/12/12
to
On May 9, 10:55 am, "M Winther" <m...@swipnet.se> wrote:
> Medieval people fostered their souls and mind. They were more
> interested in the spirit and less interested in worldly matters. This
> has given to us our supreme capacity of focusing our minds, our
> self-control, and our capacity to withstand impulses. We are still
> very interested in the intellectual, the systematic, the conceptual,
> like no other people on earth, especially not Third World people. This
> is why we are here discussing intellectual matters, much like the
> disputations of medieval scholastics and monks. They gave us this
> ability. It was their work on their souls, and their work in
> philosophy, theology, science and medicine, that gave rise to the
> Enlightenment. It did not drop down on earth from out of the blue.
> Enlightenment came about as the fruit of a long development.
Yes, "spirit" in an intelligible world context was much more
> Medieval people fostered their souls and mind. They were more
> interested in the spirit and less interested in worldly matters. This
> has given to us our supreme capacity of focusing our minds, our
> self-control, and our capacity to withstand impulses. We are still
> very interested in the intellectual, the systematic, the conceptual,
> like no other people on earth, especially not Third World people. This
> is why we are here discussing intellectual matters, much like the
> disputations of medieval scholastics and monks. They gave us this
> ability. It was their work on their souls, and their work in
> philosophy, theology, science and medicine, that gave rise to the
> Enlightenment. It did not drop down on earth from out of the blue.
> Enlightenment came about as the fruit of a long development.
profitable in yielding a groundwork for systemic thought, formal
frameworks, and methodologies to arise... Than "spirit" as this
contemporary hoodoo-forces or ghost-stuff popping open a cabinet door
every time it's closed on whatever paranormal-chasers reality show.
M Winther
May 15, 2012, 1:03:06 AM5/15/12
to
"Garret K" <hg...@v.gg> skrev i meddelandet
news:62a8a28d-d227-48c5...@a10g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
I use the term 'spirit' as that which is connected with the mind, have
been built by the mind's effort, or wich is graspable by the mind, but
not the senses. Spirit is that which isn't concrete, but which must be
fathomed by the mind, typically slowly, but sometimes it is an
overpowering experience, in the way of an autonomous force of the
unconscious. C.G. Jung says:
"From the psychological point of view, the phenomenon of spirit, like
every autonomous complex, appears as an intention of the unconscious
superior to, or at least on a par with, intentions of the ego. If we
are to do justice to the essence of the thing we call spirit, we
should really speak of a "higher" consciousness rather than of the
unconscious" ('Spirit and Life', CW 8, par. 643).
I wrote an article about this unconscious form of spirit here:
"The Unconscious is Spirit"
Abstract: Centering upon a modern man's dream about a glowing
fish, the article points out that 'the unconscious', and the much
older notion of 'the spirit', are partly overlapping spheres. The
spirit ever searches to manifest via the unconscious, and it is
expressive of the spiritual urge in mankind.
Keywords: relational unconscious, ichtys, spirit, spiritual
urge, the Unknown, religion, alchemical vessel.
Read the article here:
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/spiritfish.htm
Mats Winther
news:62a8a28d-d227-48c5...@a10g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
been built by the mind's effort, or wich is graspable by the mind, but
not the senses. Spirit is that which isn't concrete, but which must be
fathomed by the mind, typically slowly, but sometimes it is an
overpowering experience, in the way of an autonomous force of the
unconscious. C.G. Jung says:
"From the psychological point of view, the phenomenon of spirit, like
every autonomous complex, appears as an intention of the unconscious
superior to, or at least on a par with, intentions of the ego. If we
are to do justice to the essence of the thing we call spirit, we
should really speak of a "higher" consciousness rather than of the
unconscious" ('Spirit and Life', CW 8, par. 643).
I wrote an article about this unconscious form of spirit here:
"The Unconscious is Spirit"
Abstract: Centering upon a modern man's dream about a glowing
fish, the article points out that 'the unconscious', and the much
older notion of 'the spirit', are partly overlapping spheres. The
spirit ever searches to manifest via the unconscious, and it is
expressive of the spiritual urge in mankind.
Keywords: relational unconscious, ichtys, spirit, spiritual
urge, the Unknown, religion, alchemical vessel.
Read the article here:
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/spiritfish.htm
Mats Winther
0 new messages