Category Archives: Jordan Peterson

Keiko Furukura describes the Hiiromachi Station Smile Mart shes worked at for 18 years as though it were her boyfriend. She tells of how the whirring of the freezers and the beeping of the coffee machine ceaselessly caress my eardrums. And when alone at night in her small, pokey flat, she dreams so much of the brightly lit and bustling store that she begins to shape herself to please it: I silently stroke my right hand, its nails neatly trimmed in order to better work the buttons on the cash register.

Keiko is the emotionally detached star of Sayaka Muratas Convenience Store Woman, which in 2016 with the help of Ginny Tapley Takemori became the first of her 10 Japanese novels to be translated into English. Prior to getting hired at the Smile Mart aged 18, Keiko was a societal outcast who lived life in such utilitarian terms that she often horrified those around her. When as a kid she found a pretty bird dead in the school playground, her first instinct was to grill it for dinner. As a teacher struggled to break up a fight between two students, Keiko whacked one of them over the head with a spade, so hard there was blood. She gets older and fantasises about silencing her sisters wailing baby with the small knife they just used for slicing birthday cake. If it was just a matter of making him quiet, it would be easy enough.

It is only in the transparent glass box of the convenience store that she finds acceptance and purpose. On her first day, Keiko receives a uniform and a manual that prescribes her behaviour right down to the scripted interactions she must have with customers. Certainly. Right away, sir! she chimes. Thank you for your custom! She finds fulfilment in the easy rhythmic chugging of daily tasks. Stacking fizzy drink cans high. Pushing the sale of mango-chocolate buns because they are on offer. Making more croquettes than usual because people prefer them when theyve gone cold. The whoosh and thump of the fridge doors slamming under her fingertips. The glint of the light on the floor shes shined. She believes she can hear the stores voice telling me what it wanted, how it wanted to be. I understood it perfectly.

Sharing the full story, not just the headlines

Through her work, Keiko is able to ape the actions of a normal person and thus assimilate into a society she had hitherto been pushed out of. I felt reassured by the expression on Mrs Izumi and Sugawaras faces, she says after mirroring their anger at another employees failure to restock shelves properly. Good, I pulled off being a person. Id felt similarly reassured any number of times here in the convenience store.

She is so good at her job, devoting herself so wholly to its demands, that any self that exists outside of work begins to slip away into nothing. Keiko becomes like an electronic arm on a machine, picking up and putting down when its buttons are pressed. I automatically read the customers minutest movements and gaze, and my body acts reflexively in response, Keiko thinks, as she predicts from the motion of a shoppers hand that he will pay on card.

While initially Keiko goes to the Smile Mart in order to fit in, as she reaches 36, her family worry about her lack of prospects. Staying there starts to seem like an act of defiance. Worried about the fate of her work, Keiko takes useless shop worker Shiraha home with her, hoping that having a fake boyfriend might get everyone to leave her alone. Hes a greasy, lazy slob who says things that wouldnt sound out of place on an incel Reddit thread. The youngest, prettiest girls in the village go to the strongest hunters, he says, reeling off another Jordan Peterson For Dummies-style theory. They leave strong genes, while the rest of us just have to console ourselves with whats left. Feeding off her finances like a tapeworm, Shiraha eventually convinces Keiko to quit her job for a better paid one and its a breakup which leaves her devastated.

Convenience Store Woman is a gothic love story for our times, not with a vampire, a ghost or a zombie, but with those temples of consumption that glow on the edges of street corners, promising short queues and reliable products. Its capitalism kink and it makes readers anxious. How easily we are charmed by the allure of efficiency. The smooth running of the machine. Productivity distilled to its most concrete essence. But its not a manifesto, so Furukura withholds judgement and gives us permission to enjoy the love story from the bottom of its Plasticine pink heart. At least thats something you cant buy.

Heres what some of our readers thought...

May, 34, Leeds

So much of the time, in life, we are taught to want more, but in seeking it often you only get less. I work in marketing, which is supposed to be a good job, but often I miss the calm regularity of my days working in the supermarket. The coronavirus has highlighted our reliance on key workers such as shop staff. When I worked there, I didnt have any anxiety that what I was doing was useless. I feel useless often in my office job. Keiko knows the importance of what she does.

Emily, 22, London

Keiko is meant to be the weird one but as the novel progresses, you realise it is more everyone around her who is odd. Why are they so obsessed that she get a better job when she is happy? Why does she need a boyfriend or a baby? The only thing I think is a bit disappointing is that this critique of society is channelled through a character whose inability to relate to others ordinarily would be read as autistic. You dont have to have a developmental disorder to think that our fixation on career, marriage, childbirth is strange. I do too!

Matt, 45, Newcastle

Often when we work, we become not human. People dont see you when youre in a uniform. You speak in a way thats more like a robot than a person. Sometimes its relaxing it takes you out of the anxieties of wanting more, that you should make a podcast, get a new outfit. But another kind of work is possible, one where Keiko could gain pleasure not because shes erased but because shes allowed to become more herself.

Our next Indy Book Club pick will be voted for by you. Send your thoughts to annie.lord@independent.co.uk

See the article here:

The Indy Book Club: Convenience Store Woman is a gothic love story with a sickly capitalist kink - The Independent

Getty Images

Free-agent defensive end Everson Griffen remains in a holding pattern. The 32-year-old has been linked to Seattle but not many other teams has he looks for a new NFL home.

The Cardinals reportedly have interest in Griffen, according to Jeremy Fowler of ESPN.com.

Arizona is trying to boost a defense that needs plenty of help. Given all the attention devoted to Chandler Jones, Griffen would likely see some favorable matchups and, at a minimum, one-on-one opportunities.

Chad Graff of TheAthletic.com recently explained that Griffens status has been influenced in part by the inability to make visits to teams. As Vikings G.M. Rick Spielman told #PFTPM in the aftermath of the draft, the door isnt closed on a return to Minnesota; however, the Vikings lack the cap space to give Griffen the kind of deal he may expect.

Griffen has 74.5 sacks in 147 career games. He had a career-high 13.0 sacks in 2017.

Original post:

Cardinals reportedly have interest in Everson Griffen - NBCSports.com

The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled yesterday that the state shutdowns were illegal. Bar traffic results vary widely.

Nicks Bar

Brown County

Fox News - Bars Flooded

Fox News reports Wisconsin Bars Flooded with Patrons hours after state Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order.

Nicks Bar in Platteville, Wis., shared a photo on Twitter with the caption: 45 minutes after the bars open in Wisconsin showing the establishment packed with mostly young people, none of whom were wearing masks or observing social distancing.

A photo taken by the Green Bay Press-Gazette showed that the State Street Pub in Green Bay had briefly reopened with about a dozen customers inside after the state Supreme Court ruling. Decorations for St. Patricks Day, the March 17 holiday, remained on display the first day of the reopening. Neither the bartender nor the customers had masks.

But that bars reopening was also short-lived. By Wednesday night, Brown County Health Officer Anna Destree issued a local safer-at-home order to replace the now resolute state rules, requiring all county residents to remain home until at least May 20.

Star Tribune - Rolling the Dice

The Star Tribune reports Bars and other businesses quickly reopen in Wisconsin for now.

Ted Mosby couldnt help but feel conflicted Thursday as he finished his drink at Jonesys Local Bar and Grill a day after the Wisconsin Supreme Court quashed Gov. Tony Evers stay-at-home order.

The virus is real. We supposedly havent reached our peak yet. Thats the scary part, said Mosby, a carpenter and retired EMT worker. Well reach it sooner now that were open.

But its also good, he admitted, to once again sit at a bar and quench his thirst after work. Im rolling the dice. People are getting antsy. Theyre stir-crazy.

At Hop and Barrel Brewing, half the tables had been removed and as well as half the seating at those tables that remained. No one will be allowed to sit at the bar when it reopens Friday. Workers will wear masks and gloves.

At Abigail Page Antique Mall, owner Linda Weiser is allowing only five customers in at a time. Everyone must wear a mask. She offers them a pump of hand sanitizer for free, a mask for a $1 and gloves for 50 cents.

CNN - New Rules

CNN Reports Wisconsin bars reopen after court throws out stay-at-home order -- some with new rules

Seven customers showed up at BK's Bar in Shullsburg, Abby Gilbertson-Cottington, who owns the bar with her husband, told CNN. Most patrons stayed at least 6 feet apart, except for one couple who she believed may have been married.

The owner of Limanski's Pub, Kathy Goedde, was watching the news when she saw the order was overturned. "I was pretty happy about that," she told WTMJ. She's limiting capacity to a third of what the bar could hold and reminding patrons to keep social distance, WTMJ reported.

This is It!, an LGBTQ+ bar in Milwaukee, posted a note on its Facebook page telling customers it wasn't ready to reopen just yet."We, like you, want life to return to normal, but we will not force any actions or decisions that compromise health and safety," the post said.

Flood?

Perhaps there was a flood of traffic, if a dozen or so people at several bars constitutes a flood.

My concern is the complete lack of any attempts at social distancing at two of the bars. Those people are begging for another wave of infections and another crackdown.

Wisconsin Supreme Court Rules Lockdowns Are Illegal

Yesterday I noted Wisconsin Supreme Court Rules Lockdowns Are Illegal

Conservative justices on the Wisconsin Supreme Court struck down Democratic Gov. Tony Evers monthslong stay-at-home order in a ruling released Wednesday.

The 4-3 decision marked the first time a states highest court has overturned a stay-at-home order amid the coronavirus pandemic and sided with Republican leaders who argued the governors administration had overstepped its legal authority.

Bizarre Ruling

In a bizarre ruling the Supreme Court ruled that the State could not order closings because it constituted Tyranny, yet the court allowed local politicians to do the same.

As a result, Madison and Milwaukee immediately reimposed the lockdowns,

The result is 72 counties doing their own thing,

Partisan Judges

We can debate the case all day, without changings anyone's mind on what should be done.

But this seems like a half-assed decision that will please no one, or perhaps half the people, half the time, depending on the county.

One question lingers: Why are there elected partisan judges in the first place?

Mish

Read more here:

Wisconsin Bars Flooded With Traffic, Or Are They? - TheStreet

Mohamed, (not his real name), was a Muslim in his 30s, an migr from Iran who had built a life for himself in Canada. Sadly, a blanket of personal problems marred his efforts to thrive. He sought out psychotherapy. For the sake of rapport, I made a mental note to avoid mention of Jewish insights into human nature, normally a staple in my work.

As the therapy progressed, my apprehension dissolved. So relevant were the ideas of Rabbi Akiva Tatz and other Jewish thinkers that I began to introduce Mohamed to concepts that spoke directly to the challenges with which he grappled. He was intrigued and one day reflected, Ive read a lot about Buddhism and new age psychology but I know nothing about the Jewish approach. Can you recommend a book? I suggested Rabbi Tatzs Living Inspired and when our session ended he went to a local Judaica shop and picked up that book and three others.

Mohamed made nice progress in the work. He implemented important changes and I commended him; these changes were quite dramatic. To demonstrate just how so, he described an incident that had occurred 10 years earlier when he stood in army fatigues with 250 other Iranian soldiers, all heavily equipped with weapons. The men participated in a familiar ritual: the burning of the American and Israeli flags as the men shouted, Death to Israel! Death to America! He looked me dead in the eye and said, Ten years later, Im buying books at the Judaica store!

I was shocked, but shouldnt have been. As we approach Shavous, the commemoration of receiving the Torah at Mount Sinai, we can remember that Jewish thought is part of the arsenal we are given to change the world. This body of knowledge contains timeless wisdom that can help individuals change, both Jew and non-Jew.

Case in point: I would argue that, right now, the most widely recognized mouthpiece for any number of important Jewish concepts is a Gentile, Dr. Jordan Peterson. When I stumbled upon his work, I was amazed at the resonance between his ideas and those of Rabbi Akiva Tatz, author of both Living Inspired and Worldmask. Indeed, my excitement about this resonance and the way the Rabbis ideas inform those of Peterson compelled my writing of two books: This Way up: A Faith-Based Introduction to Jordan Petersons Maps of Meaning and In Good Standing: Using Jordan Petersons Insights on the Structure of Self to Sort Yourself Out.

Its ironic that so many Jewish psychotherapists seeking to anchor their work in a wisdom tradition pursue Buddhist studies. These practitioners dont realize the wealth of resources that are rightly theirs, if only they would look in their own backyards!

But dont take my word for it. Take Mohameds. His ancestors werent included in the Sinai experience. But maybe his experience shows theres a basis for the old proverb: if Mohamed cant come to the mountain, bring the mountain to Mohamed. And every year at Shavous, the mountain comes to you.

Interested?

Annette Poizner is a Columbia-trained clinical social worker who graduated with a Doctorate of Education in Counseling Psychology. As an Israeli-trained graphologist, she specializes in projective personality assessment, as well as strategic psychotherapy. Her work has been featured extensively in the media and in academic venues. She founded Lobster University Press, an imprint which explores the work of Jordan Peterson. Her books, the most recent being, "From Chaos to Order: A Guide to Jordan Peterson's Worldview," summarize Peterson's ideas and explore the intersection between his insights and Jewish wisdom. She also produces animations which relay some of Peterson's insights in short soundbites.

Read more:

Mohamed and the Mountain | Annette Poizner | The Blogs - The Times of Israel

LAHS NEWS

Los Alamos High School Principal Carter Payne has announced the names of the graduating Class of 2020. They are as follows:

Anna Maria Abeyta

Haley Anna Adams Brown

Nichelle Hailey Aguilar

Lexi Anastajia Alcala

Laila Amin

Samuel Fidelis Anderson

Matthew Brandon Archuleta

Samantha Jasmine Archuleta

Dara Ann Armstrong

Michael Owen Aslam

Natalie Megan Aulwes

Aelma Azad

Jonathan Baca

Samantha Baca

John Alexander Baker

Jade Leonarda Banuelos

Jeremy Joseph Baros

James Zachary Beck

Talia Miriam Ben-Naim

Jacob Marc Benelli

Thomas Gary Benson

Ogden Berry

Abigail Beus

Drew Bingham

Catherine Mary Bitteker

Claire Elizabeth Bluhm

Samuel Adam Bond

Casey Michael Borden

Sarina Nicole Borden

Jackson Ray Bowles

Zachery Robert Michael Brown

Rebecca Anne Brug

Michael William Budge

Vaclav Budzileni-Maldonado

Lillian Love Bueck

Dimitri Robert Bullock

Zoe Jean Butler

Elektra Caffrey

Gavin Diego Campos

Helen Tabea Caparone

John Marcus Caparone

Eric Carney

Laila Fernanda Carrillo Garcia

Joshua David Carson

James Carl Cassel

Jayme Elizabeth Cayton

Carlos J. Chacon Cuesta

Miguel A. Chacon Cuesta

Celeste Anne Chandler

Elizabeth Marie Chapman

Olivia Tess Chavarria

Lucario Alan Lujn Chvez

Michael Anatol Chigaev

Caden Matthew Cionek

Erik Timothy Cleland

Amaya Coblentz

Preslie Austin Coffey

Jonathan Cox

Isabel Crooker

Sarah Michelle Crotzer

Santiago Angelito Culin

Connor Michael Dale

Olivia Grace DeCroix

Isabella Maria Delgado

Alexandra Viktoria Dolin

Kevin Martin Dors

Allegra Sue Dougherty

Sean Martin Dougherty

Dennis Adam Drew Vazquez

Javier Duarte Gastelum

Dakota James Duran

Mia Felice Durn

Ariel Edkin

Tayra Jenna Eidenbenz

Awan David Carson Ellenwood

Gage Charles Ellis

Jenna Mercedes Espinoza

Mei Belle Eutsler

Sydney Elizabeth Favorite

Suyana Renee Ferreira

Anna Filina

Joseph W. Foley

Daniel Aedan Fryer

Riley Brighten Fullbright

Natalie Ellora Gallegos

Alexis Lee Ann Garcia

Bernadette Alexia Garcia

Liliana Garcia

Ryan Jacob Garcia

Sruthi Garimella

Adam John Garrett

Ona Anisha Piu Gartz

Alex Jordan Geyer

Isabella Nichole Gillie

Amber Nichole Gould

Rebecca Lauryn Green

Calixta Kayla Guerrero Gonzales

See more here:

Congratulation To All 278 Class Of 2020 Graduates - Los Alamos Reporter

With respect to McManus and Hamilton, who have admittedly produced a very interesting article, there are characterizations and theoretical points within their article that I feel need to be addressed.

Introduction

As a practicing psychotherapist investigating political expressions of psychoanalytic thought, I was very interested to read Matt McManus and Conrad Hamiltons recent critique of Jungian and Lacanian perspectives. I was also intrigued by McManus and Hamiltons choice to assign, respectively, these thinkers to the Right and Left of the political spectrum. They did this, in large part, through their interpretations of how Jordan Peterson and Slavoj iek have, in turn, drawn from each psychoanalysts work. With respect to McManus and Hamilton, who have admittedly produced a very interesting article, there are characterizations and theoretical points within their article that I feel need to be addressed. In particular, it is necessary to demonstrate more accurately the complexity of the perspectives held up as representatives (I believe inaccurately) of Left-situated or Right-situated expressions of psychoanalysis.

Although clear divisions of Lacanian thought into the Left and Jungian thought into the Right might make for an engagingyet choppy articlethere are a number of similarities between the two perspectives. There are also complexities internal to these perspectives that have to be eclipsed for this interpretation to hold. Especially noticeable in reading their article were the failure to acknowledge the left-wing Jungian streams of theoretical development (that have largely been ignored since Jungs death), the equation of Petersons focus on order from chaos with the aim of Jungian analysis in general, and the erasure of theoretical similarities between Lacan and Jungs perspectives. Also, I believe there were some inaccuracies regarding admittedly difficult aspects of Lacanian theory (the misrepresentation of the early infants relationship to the mirror stage, for example), as well as a degree of irony when the two authors (themselves influenced by Marxism) invoke charges about lacking evidence or unfalsifiabilitywhen it comes to those with whom they disagree. However, I will sideline these later concerns in favor of primarily addressing the implicit characterization of Jungian thought as being inherently conservative or right-wing in analytic approach.

To a degree, I believe that the authors are aware and acknowledge partially the complexities of Jungian thought, and this causes some discomfort with the original premise of their piece. McManus and Hamilton take pains to differentiate and separate the decidedly un-progressive personal figure of Jacques Lacan (Freud was not a progressive) from the interpretations of Lacans interlocutors. These interlocutors were often the resolutely fashionable left-wing figures, who haunt the bookshelves and syllabuses of continental philosophy departments. These names include Julia Kristeva, Luce Irigaray, and, of course, the focal figure of their article: Slavoj iek. This highlighting of the development of Lacanian theory through its academic interpreters allows it to be positioned on the Left, within the topology of McManus and Hamiltons article.

It is strange, therefore, that the Jungian analogue to psychoanalysis (analytic psychology) does not receive the same treatment. Instead, when it comes to the supposedly right-wing orientation of Jungian analytical psychology, we are presented with a paucity of examples. We are offered Jungs alleged racism, his spurious personal actions during the Second World War, and his influence on Jordan Peterson as proof for their characterization of Jung as right-wing. It is important to note here that Peterson, while a renowned clinical psychologist, was not a trained Jungian analyst. iek, on the other hand, is a trained (albeit not practicing) Lacanian analyst. As such, to use Peterson and iek as examples of their relative schools is already perhaps to overstate the point. McManus and Hamiltons somewhat impoverished overview of Jungian thought may also be partly due to the acknowledged unpopularity of Jung within the academy. The authors are academics, rather than clinicians; so their seeming lack of familiarity with the outgrowths of Jungian theory can perhaps be forgiven. Who (outside the murky world of clinical psychoanalysis and psychotherapy) could be expected to know the permutations and arcane growths of post-Jungian theory? Instead, as they did in their piece, it might be easier to focus on the twin poisons of mysticism and racism, when it comes to Jung.

McManus and Hamilton reduce Jungian thought to the twin streams of the problematic proclamations of its founder and the fiery exhortations against progressivism leveled by its most easy listening popular exponent, Jordan Peterson. Yet, there are many broadly progressive and left-wing developments that have emerged from (and been influenced by) the Jungian field. Indeed, McManus and Hamilton mention the Anti-Oedipal work of Gilles Deleuze and Flix Guattari as being desirably progressive critics of Lacan. However, McManus and Hamilton fail to mention the tribute that these two thinkers pay to Jung in their 1980 book A Thousand Plateaus. Within A Thousand Plateaus work, Jungian archetypal theory is, indeed, referenced. Although described as insufficiently deterritorializing, Jungs approach is seen by Deleuze and Guattari as being closer to the mark than the single all-encompassing Oedipal model employed by Freud. This refers to the Oedipal framework which, of course, Lacan based his entire theoretical edifice around in his return to Freud.

This Deleuzian connection runs deeper than this single mention in the Capitalism and Schizophrenia series. Deleuze further references Jungs work inhis 1968 book Difference and Repetition, and Deleuzian ideas expressed within this book are reflected theoretically in the work of the former Jungian (and creator of Archetypal Psychology) James Hillman. Hillman was originally a Jungian analyst, who guided studies at the Jung Institute in Zurich. His workwithin books such as Re-Visioning Psychologyreflects a pluralist, deconstructionist, and anti-authoritarian turn within Jungian thought. There are also influences from the Sufi mysticism of Henry Corbin. Years before Jordan Peterson arrived on the scene, Hillman had already anticipated and argued against popular conservative interpretation of Jung. He did this by critiquing the over-emphasis on the monotheistic (slaying-the-dragon-of-chaos) Hero archetype, as well as the individualist ego later associated with it.

Hillman felt the over-identification with this archetype was inherent to Western cultures excesses. And his own pluralist re-imagining of Jungian theory sought to mitigate this through emphasis on difference. He also railed preemptively against Petersonian reductions of archetypal imagery to evolutionary psychology and biological processes. Again, Hillman saw these as attempts to slay the power of the images of the unconscious, stultifying them by turning them into abstract scientific concepts. Furthermore, Hillman questioned the individualist basis of therapy, advocating for changes in the political and social world. As such, he anticipated many left-wing critiques of this individualism inherent in the profession, such as those articulated in Anti-Oedipus. As perhaps the most popular post-Jungian psychologist in the United States (apart from Peterson), it can hardly be said that Hillman was right-wing or conservative.

Further examples of radical attitudes latent within the Jungian model of analysis are plentiful. For example, the interpretation of psychosis as a breakdown-to-breakthrough, a spontaneous reorganization of the conscious self by the unconscious, also reflects and anticipates the anti-Oedipal promotion of deterritorialization, within the work of Deleuze and Guattari. The importance of Jungs personal deterritorialization and psychotic breakdown to the creation of his system are most clearly illustrated via the posthumous release of the almost Lovecraftian esoteric tome called The Red Book.The Red Book features an articulation of the content of Jungs breakdown, complete with psychedelic artwork and a hallucinogenic narrative of underworld figures. Jungian scholars such as Sonu Shamdasani and Hillman have held this as being far more foundational to the creation of his school than the influence of Freud, and the entire book can be held up as an instance of deterritorialization, par excellence. These elements do not a conservative form of psychoanalysis make. Far from the imposition of a right-wing orderor, slaying of chaosthis is a descent into the abyss of the underworld and a reforging of self and identity through deterritorialization and radical difference, in the vein of Zarathustra.

To fail to present these elements of Jungian thought and characterize it as merely a vessel of Petersonian order is to exclude its essential origin myth. With the above points in mind, it becomes difficult to maintain the view of Jungian analysis as a right-wing perspective. Although the authors of the original article do pay some heed to the contradictions between Jung and Petersons interpretations, by excluding the other half of Jung (the many ways in which Jungian theory emerges from more of a Deleuzoguattarian upsurge of radical difference and otherness), a false image of theoretical conservatism is more sustainable. It is not my intention to hold up Jung as a progressive icon in opposition to McManus and Hamiltons articleor to present him as a hidden leftist. Rather, I seek to highlight the ambiguities within his work and the more progressive tendencies of those of his followers who are not named Jordan Petersonand who have had far more legitimate clinical (though perhaps less popular) impact.

Race, Antisemitism, and Jung

Jungs behavior during the Second World War is also put forward by McManus and Hamilton as to why Jungian analytic psychology should been regarded as an inherently right-wing articulation of psychoanalysis. While it is true that Jung performed ambiguous (often unacceptably complicit) actions in regard to Nazismand made statements that even for the time and context would have been considered Antisemitic (See Stephen Froshs work on the subject)he also worked in order to help Jewish colleagues escape from Nazi Germany. Jung also explicitly criticized the Nazi regime, once the explicit barbarity of it became more apparent. This, of course, does not excuse his earlier actions or his Antisemitism. However, again, we are presented with an ambiguity that has led to intense levels of soul-searching, within the Jungian analytic profession. Theoretically, as Hamilton and McManus point out, this profession has a vested interest in exploring and articulating the shadow not only of the individual client but also of the personality of Jung himselfand of Jungian institutions.

Jungs Antisemitism especially has been laid bare not only by Frosh but by the well-respected Jungian Analyst Andrew Samuels. Samuels, as one of the most prominent and high-profile Jungian thinkers, again shows the political ambiguity in Jungian thought. Samuels actually is far more deserving of the title of representative of this school of analysis than is Peterson. Samuels, for instance, has been the chair of the United Kingdom Council for Psychotherapy. He was also an advisor for the British Labour government and one of the first professors of Jungian Analytic psychology in the world. Samuels has also long been the pre-eminent voice in political psychotherapy of any denomination: promoting a very strongly pluralist, left-wing, and progressively-orientated approach to integrating these two fields. His identity as a Jungian is not in contradiction to his political identity as a leftist. Jung and Jungian thought hold a level of ambiguity that McManus and Hamilton miss, either owing to their ignorance of its existence or as a result of misconstruing Jungs complicated background for the convenience of creating a simple binary: Left or Right.

It is Jungs initialoften deeply flawed or problematicpersonal explorations around questions of plurality, difference, and race that allowed for post-Jungian theory to develop reflexivity around these questions, which Hillman and Samuels demonstrate. This evolution is even reflected in the tribute to Jungs theory that decolonial pioneer Frantz Fanon makes in his 1952 book Black Skin, White Masks. This is the book where Fanon attributes his own theories around introjected racial consciousness as being inspired by those made by Jung. Although Fanon was a Lacanian by training (and emphasizes the constructed rather than inherent basis to archetypes in his appropriation of archetypal theory), still Fanon acknowledges that his work owes some debt to Jungs original psychoanalytic exploration of racial consciousness. Again, my point here is not to excuse Jungs racism by reference to Fanon. Rather, I aim to illustrate that even around the issues of race, Jung (and also his legacy in terms of post-Jungian analytical psychology) is far more complex than McManus and Hamilton imply.

Peterson as Senex Possessed

Although McManus and Hamilton do mention in passing that Petersons work is an idiosyncratic rendition of Jung, it is perhaps not emphasized enough how Petersons over-emphasis on the aspects of order, the individual ego, and the heroic slaying of chaos moves away from anything resembling the aim of Jungian clinical work. What these aspects of Peterson perhaps would indicate to a Jungian analyst is a personality under possession of what is called a Senex archetype: This archetype is the Grey old man, the representative of established order. It is reminiscent of the image of Saturn devouring his children. While standing for repression, stasis and, conservatism, he rails against the attempts of the young to gain power and overthrow order. The Senex is often seen as being within an archetypal complex, in which it is positioned in conflict with the archetype of the Puer (the eternal youth). We can see Peterson falling into this complex through his position as the substitute dad of estranged Western masculinity. He follows this with father-like exhortations to clean ones bedroom. Then, there is the mutual hatred between Peterson and the infantilized Puers of the social justice movement. Petersons theoretical reduction of the images of the unconscious psyche to biological and evolutionary explanations would also be likely seen by many Jungian thinkers as an example of a Senex possession. This results in an attempt to make concrete the fluid material of the unconscious. In this way, individuation and differentiation can take place and, therefore, fossilize the unconscious: ossify it in a form that is more socially and academically acceptable to explainor, as Deleuze would have, Oedipalize it.

Possession of the personality through an archetypal complex such as this is far from the aim of individuation in the Jungian sense. With more integral interpretations of Jung as seen in the works of Hillman, Samuels, or even from Jung himself (within The Red Book), individuation is, instead, articulated as being the differentiation of self via bringing forth radical difference from the unconscious. In holding Peterson as an exemplar of Jungian thought, a caricature of analytical psychology as conservative can be promoted. However, this cannot be sustained if any sort of faithful account of Jungian theory is provided.

It might be said that in trying to cleanly divide Jung and Lacan into Right and Left political positions, it is almost a replication of the Senex-Puer complex that I identified Petersons work as suffering from. Admittedly, there is perhaps some attraction in framing the perspectives of complex, ambiguous thinkers in this way. It allows one to frame ones preferred perspective as either that of a righteous rebel or, alternatively, a defender of order. The truth is thatmuch like Lacanunderneath the unipolar portrayal of Jung by McManus and Hamilton, an ambiguous figure lurks. There is a figure who is sometimes conservative but sometimes radically other. There is a figure who emphasizes individuation and differentiationbut also the influence of collective archetypes. There is a figure who saves his Jewish colleagues but promotes theories of Aryan supremacy. Jung is a profoundly complex figure. As such, there must be a reckoning with himin all of his ambiguitythroughout the academy before his form of psychoanalysis can be labelled right-wing.

Nick Opyrchal is a psychotherapist in private practice. For his M.A., he researched the intersection between Lacanian and transpersonal perspectives in psychotherapy. His current doctoral work investigates the intersection of identity politics and the transpersonal within psychotherapy.

See the original post here:

Jordan Peterson and Carl Jung's Worldviews Have Been Greatly Oversimplified - Merion West

On this weeks episode of The Ben Shapiro Show: Sunday Special, The Daily Wire editor-in-chief talked with Dave Rubin, the host of The Rubin Report, about his upcoming title Dont Burn This Book: Thinking For Yourself In An Age Of Unreason, which will be released on Tuesday.

During the conversation, Shapiro asks Rubin about his close-knit relationship with Professor Jordan Peterson, who remarks on the front cover of the upcoming book that it is topical, engaging, personable, and, above all, reassuring.

I want to get back to some of the lessons that you have, Shapiro told Rubin. One of the ones that really struck me, because it was actually rather moving, is your discussion of your relationship with Jordan Peterson.

Rubin then talks about an event he did with Peterson and Shapiro in Los Angeles and the vitriol that was targeted at them in response before going into some observations about Petersons resolve during his own book tour for 12 Rules For Life: An Antidote To Chaos.

We found out in the middle of the tour that his wife had what they thought was terminal cancer thank God it turned out not to be terminal, and shes actually doing much better, said Rubin.

Try and imagine this guy who was a mild-mannered psychologist and professor, who suddenly became the worlds father in a way, really the pre-eminent public thinker of our time, he said. The fame, the hit pieces. You know, you remember the enforced monogamy hit piece in The New York Times, and you remember the Cathy Newman so what youre saying is moment.

All of those things, living through all of that and then thinking his wife is going to die, said Rubin. We were at lunch, at a steakhouse of course, when he got the call about his wife. I saw this man live through something unbelievably, extraordinarily horrible or as he would say brutal and always put his best foot forward.

I never saw him break one of those rules, said Rubin, referring to the rules set forth in the professors own book. I saw him just trying to be true, and if he gave me anything, through osmosis or through accident, its that. I am really trying to do that.

Shapiro also asks whether Rubin has learned any particular lessons from Peterson, noting that a passage of Dont Burn This Book talks about the professors decision to improve his public appearance.

Rubin emphasizes the importance of dressing well, and recalled when he was touring in Sweden, he overheard a conversation between a young man and a cashier, and that the young man remarked that he was buying a suit for the first time to go see Petersons lecture.

I thought, this is absolutely incredible, said Rubin. [Hes] buying the first suit of his life so that he can present himself in a responsible way, to go to an event to hear how he can further fix his life.

After the Sunday Special was published, Peterson himself remarked that the interview between Rubin and Shapiro contained comments from good friends.

WATCH:

The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream medias rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a subscriber.

Read the original post:

Dave Rubin Talks To Shapiro About Learning From Jordan Peterson On Tour - The Daily Wire

Adair: Garrett Long, 6-0, jr.

Beggs: Kendal Daniels, 6-4, jr.

Berryhill: Davis Dotson, 6-6, so.

Bixby: Xavier Glenn, 6-3, jr.; Parker Fredrickson, 6-1, fr.

Bristow: DJ Overstreet, 5-9, sr.

Broken Arrow: Anthony Allen, 6-5, so.; George McCurdy, 6-2, jr.; Jaiell Talley, 6-5, jr.

Cascia Hall: Luke Lawson, 6-3, sr.

Catoosa: J Coons, 6-4, sr.; Gavin Phillips, 6-0, sr.

Central: Caylen Goff-Brown, 6-1, so.; Trae Washington, 6-0, sr.

Claremore: Caison Hartloff, 6-4, jr.

Claremore Christian: Logan Picolett, 5-10, fr.

Claremore Sequoyah: Zach Perry, 6-3, sr.

Cleveland: Kyler Kauk, 6-0, so.

Collinsville: Gaige Longshore, 6-3, sr.

Coweta: Chandler Wheeler, 6-5, sr.

Cushing: Wil Moyer, 5-9, sr.; Dominic Turner, 6-2, so.

East Central: Will McGuire, 6-0, jr.

Edison: Quentin Asberry, 6-4, sr.; Loddie Combs, 6-2, sr.; Brandon Stuart, 6-1, sr.

Glencoe: Bryce Coe, 6-1, so.; Jaken Weedn, 5-11, fr.

Glenpool: Jimauri Bradford, 6-0, jr.; Avery Cook 6-4, jr.; Isaac Tiger, 6-0, jr.

Hale: Demitrius Neal, 5-11, so.

Haskell: Zane Adams, 6-2, sr.

Hilldale: TJ Maxwell, 5-11, sr.

Holland Hall: Garrett Eaton, 6-3, sr.; Kyle Hook, 6-3, sr.

Jenks: Ben Averitt, 6-5, so.; Ike Houston, 6-4, sr.; Chase Martin, 6-5, so.

Kelley: Matthew Plaisance, 5-10, jr.; Eli Wallace, 6-0, jr.

Locust Grove: Zeke Simpson, 6-0, sr.

Mannford: Tyler Day, 5-10, so.; Connor Hewitt, 6-2, sr.

Memorial: Ty Frierson, 5-9, so.; Will Hill, 6-1, sr.; Brayshawn Hubbard-Finch, 6-5, sr.

Metro Christian: Caden Hale, 6-1, sr.; Ian Sluice, 6-2, jr.

Muskogee: Xavier Brown, 5-11, sr.

Oologah: Konner Davis, 5-7, sr.

Owasso: Caden Fry, 6-7, so.; Kyler Mann, 6-4, jr.

Pawnee: Gunnar Gordon, 5-9, so.; Brad Reeves, 5-11, so.

Pryor: Ryan Freeman, 5-9, sr.

Regent Prep: Harrison Smith, 5-8, sr.

Rejoice Christian: Gage Barham, 5-11, sr.; Riley Walker, 5-11, sr.

Rogers: Marcal Johnson, 5-11, jr.

Sand Springs: Josh Minney, 6-4, sr.

Sapulpa: Hunter Hoggatt, 6-5, sr.; Jackson Skipper, 6-7, jr.;

Skiatook: Jayden Garner, 6-1, sr.

Sperry: Jayden Bridgeman, 6-0, jr.

Tahlequah Sequoyah: C-Jay Soap, 5-10, sr.

Union: Nehemiah Boykins, 6-4, sr.; Seth Chargois, 6-4, sr.; RJ Forney, 6-1, sr.; Micah Lovett, 5-11, sr.

Verdigris: Tyler Haddock, 6-2, sr.

Victory Christian: Luke Patton, 6-6, sr.; Josh Udoumoh, 6-2, so.

Wagoner: Jacob Scroggins, 6-4, jr.

Webster: Tojuan Pryor, 6-3, sr.; Isaiah Sanders, 5-10, jr.; Martwon Taylor, 5-10, jr.

Pictured above: Edison senior Quentin Asberry

World sports writer Barry Lewis made the final decisions after nomination forms were sent to all the schools in the Tulsa metro area. Coaches were asked to nominate players from their teams and select the best five from other teams. Players from grades 9-12 were eligible. A metro school is any school within 60 miles of the Worlds downtown office plus any school within 75 miles located in a town with a population of more than 5,000.

Go here to see the original:

Watch now: Remembering Michael Jordans 1982 weekend and loss to TU at the Mabee Center - Tulsa World

Corey Friedman

Creators Syndicate

By Corey Friedman

Dont expect Rep. Justin Amash to shatter the political duopoly and make the Libertarian Party competitive in national elections. But dont be surprised if Amash becomes the prototype for a new breed of American conservative.

The Michigan congressman who left the Republican Party last July is exploring a Libertarian presidential bid. Hes drawn the ire of President Donald Trumps critics, who fear an Amash candidacy could play a spoiler role by drawing never-Trump Republicans away from presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden, helping the president win a second term.

Despite his star power, Amash isnt a lock for the Libertarian nomination. Attorney and author Jacob Hornberger is the partys front-runner, with seven primary wins, and the second-place candidate is Vermin Supreme, the satirist and performance artist known for wearing a boot on his head.

Thomas L. Knapp, a pundit who runs a libertarian think tank, wrote that hes tired of his party picking recently Republican politicians as its standard-bearers. Reinforcing that trend could scare off left-leaning independents.

A founding member of the House Freedom Caucus, Amash has made a consistent case for limited government, personal freedom and budgetary restraint. Hes Ron Pauls ideological heir, and while he wont lead Libertarians to the promised land, he may be the future of post-Trump Republicanism.

His experience of leaving the Republican Party and joining the Libertarian Party speaks more about internal Republican Party politics in that the party seems to have gone from a principled policy orientation to a politics of personality orientation, explained Michael Bitzer, professor of politics and history at Catawba College.

I phoned Bitzer, a leading political scientist in North Carolina, to gauge the impact of Amashs insurgent campaign. He reads the tea leaves as well as anyone, but said its too early to tell whether an Amash candidacy would help Trump by capturing crossover Republicans whod otherwise support Biden.

The standard I teach is third parties are typically spoilers, Bitzer said, noting that Green Party hopeful Ralph Nader is thought to have hobbled Democratic nominee Al Gore in the 2000 election and independent Ross Perot likely cost President George H.W. Bush a second term in 1992.

While some conservatives and right-leaning independents may flirt with Amash in early polls, Bitzer expects most voters to pick the major-party candidate whose views best align with their own.

I think in this hyperpolarized environment, the two parties are going to be consistent, he said. Third parties will try and break through, but the two parties have control of the political system in a variety of ways.

The silver lining for Amashs admirers is that future GOP candidates may be molded in his image.

The modern Republican Party is essentially a coalition of social conservatives and economic libertarians. As the former group ages and sees its influence wane, the party could be recast as a home for classical liberals who care more about preserving individual freedom than dictating a collective morality.

Across the board, Bitzer notes, millennials are supportive of gay marriage and equal rights for women and minorities. Young conservatives may be religious, but theyre skeptical of government having a role in spiritual matters. For the first time in 2018, polls showed a majority of Republicans now favor legalizing marijuana.

This conflict is inevitable, Bitzer said. Thats where things are headed. That could redefine the conservative movement in a way we have not seen in the past 40-50 years. Reagan really formed the religious right in modern American politics. But this generational shift is saying, Were fine with same-sex marriage. Just leave us alone.

Millennial Republicans are more in line with Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson than Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. They champion free speech, which has fallen out of favor on the far left, particularly when that speech offends members of minority groups.

Amash may be too conservative for Libertarian Party purists who want a doctrinaire candidate thundering, Taxation is theft, but hell be libertarian enough for a retooled Republican Party thats socially tolerant and hews close to pocketbook politics.

When will that culture shift begin in earnest? If Trump is ousted and Democrats recapture the White House in November, maybe sooner than later.

Corey Friedman is editor of The Wilson Times and executive editor of Restoration NewsMedia. In this weekly column for Creators Syndicate, he explores solutions to political conflicts from an independent perspective. Follow him on Twitter @coreywrites. To read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit http://www.creators.com.

Originally posted here:

Justin Amash could lead conservative reformation - Spring Hope Enterprise

Its day 2,346 of staying home, and if youre like me, youve streamed yourself into a coma. I actually watched the John Gotti biopic starring John Travolta the other day, thats how bad its getting (It wasnt as bad as youd think).

If your brain and soul are hungry for something deeper, two surly, foul-mouthed British comedians are here to the rescue. In the most recent episode of his podcast Under the Skin, comedian Russell Brand interviews fellow British comedy luminary Ricky Gervais. I became a fan of Brands podcast after his two amazing conversations with Jordan Peterson, both of which also provide excellent intellectual calisthenics.

The hour-long episode covers everything from Gervaiss love for animals, their narcissism, and the nuances of God, spirituality, and religion. While you may not agree with either, seeing these two exceptionally bright, self-effacing, piss-and-vinegar comedians exchanging barbs and wisdom is just the mental stimulation you need today. Their own search for the truth might even prompt the sort of self-reflection we all could use at this time. Heres a sneak preview.

Brand and Gervais are millionaires many times over and enjoy even greater fame in Britain than in the United States. Still, neither came from wealth or acclaim. Brand was an only child raised by a single mom. Gervais signature edgy humor is inextricably tied to growing up in the working class. Knowing where they stand in society can be tricky.

As Gervais explains, Were court jesters we have to be court jesters. We have to have low status. Were in the mud with all the other peasants, teasing the king. But we have to keep our low status somehow, I think. I feel I want to.

Gervais is the creator of the original The Office series, and Brand talks about feeling sorry for his character, David Brent. The pair both see him as a sad figure, engaged in ever more absurd acts in order to reach a place of acceptance or worth. Compared to our reality TV culture nowadays, this character isnt even absurd anymore.

As Gervais jokes, Big Brother contestants make deals with the producers to get on the show. Let me in there, and Ill start a fight and take my clothes off. It facilitates the emotional destruction of people who just want to be loved and the public eats it up. As Brand puts it, Theres been a glorification of idiocy in culture.

Gervais laments the toll this takes on fame-seekers. This obsession with seeing normal people destroy themselves. These people keep going back to fame and going, Do you love me yet? No, they dont love you, they want you to fail!

Gervais is a well-known atheist. While both men have substantial criticism for organized religion, Brands travels through addiction and mental illness have given him a firm belief in some kind of god and a sense of interconnectedness.

Im a solipsistic, narcissistic person, Brand says. Ive been through the mills of addiction, sex, fame, drugs, money, and all that kind of stuff, and its placed me at a point where Ive had to open myself up to different ideas.

He means this as a challenge to Gervais that while they both have criticisms for organized religion, Brand sees Gervais as having a similar sense of wonder and awe at the universe, the same wonder that prompted Brands spirituality.

Gervais concedes, I seem like a spiritual person, but not literally, which is totally true. I am in as much awe at seeing a tree, or a mountain, or a bird, or a river as anyone who thinks God made it. I see the beauty of nature.

While Brand sympathizes with Gervais distaste for the constraints of organized religion, he explains, Ive gone on sort of the opposite journey, in that I feel like I started off atheistic just in that I would reject any attempt to impose regulation or control on me for the purposes of domination.

But as Ive gone through my own stuff with addiction and mental health or whatever it is, Brand continues, my own sense of despair particularly looking at it from a perspective of mental health issues and addiction is that there is an unaddressed yearning for a kind of oneness, togetherness, and for love.

While Gervais understands that desire for connectedness, he doesnt think desire alone is enough to make it true. It is a terrifying prospect that well never exist again, I think, but it doesnt mean its not true, says Gervais.

The bottom line is I cant believe something I dont believe. So how do I find meaning? Well, we are here. The chances of us being us you being you and me being me, existing now, that sperm hitting that egg is 400 trillion to one. Were not special, but we are lucky. We do exist. Its incredible.

As were looking for ways to occupy our minds in this strange time, this conversation is worth a listen. You may disagree with Brand or Gervais conclusions; I do. The redeeming undercurrent, however, is that both men are seekers of the truth. Their convictions are born of deep consideration, and they are willing to follow them to their natural conclusions, no matter how disappointing or inconvenient. Now might be just the moment we need to consider what we really believe as well.

Caroline D'Agati is a writer, former park ranger, and New Jersey expatriate living in DC. She studied English at Georgetown and media studies at The New School. You can follow her on Twitter at @carodagati.

Originally posted here:

Russell Brand And Ricky Gervais Are Just What Your Brain Needs - The Federalist