What a delightful discussion! Conversations between SV and DBH should happen at least on quarterly basis (and even more frequently, if possible). Salley Vickers is not only a smart, educated, and quite charming interlocutor; she also gets DBH to open up on some topics he doesn’t usually discuss in public spaces (like fairies and prophetic dreams).
As regards Andersen, perhaps some of his tales must be kept away from kids, but surely every child must read The Emperor’s New Clothes, The Ugly Duckling, and The Snow Queen, else they won’t understand a great number of references and homages in subsequent works of literature and entertainment media.
On a side note, Ms. Vickers, if you are reading this, I just want to tell you how much I liked The Gardener. The narrative, the style, and the whole ensemble of characters were all fantastic (in all senses). Phyllis is probably my favorite and I really hope you have met someone in your life who has served as an inspiration for her. Although I strongly disagree with her that the lion should never lie down with the lamb. (I am simply not brave enough to accept a world where natural evil isn’t meant to be overcome in the eschatological horizon.)
I love it when you discuss OT stuff, Dr. Hart. I was taught to be a crude literalist and was told the OT was the perfect revelation without flaw and cannot be questioned. These discussions are very helpful for us. I hope you know.
I’ve been listening to this conversation while I exercise as of late; I just got to the part about dreams.
This sort of thing always reminds me of the great mathematician Ramanujan, who unarguably had one of the most frighteningly formidable intellects in the history of the field. Apparently, and I’ve not looked too deeply into the matter, he also received some theorems in his dreams from the family god—great scrolls of elliptic integrals unrolling before his eyes and such. It’s curious business.
I can't get so much as a whisper in response to prayer and other people's gods are handing out mathematical theorems in dreams? That Galilean peasant better come through in the eschaton, or I'm going to be very cross.
I finally listened to the last 20 minutes of this lovely conversation. I’m glad I did, for it contained some of my favorite moments. I will always feel some gratitude toward Alex Rosenberg. I was wracking my brain, casting about, trying to understand how he could reconcile his views on intentionality with the (presumably intentional) act of writing a book, when I discovered an essay from a wonderful writer I’d never heard of before . . . one David Bentley Hart. Thanks again, Alex!
Are you familiar with Nabokov's book on dreaming as premonitions. He loathed Freud and my profession in general which I get. The rift between Jung and Freud still acts out! Not near the civility even between Russell and Copleston! But Nabokov was heavily influenced by an English physicist (I think...) but sadly the books must have gone with thousands of others due to lack of space...like you and Rowan Williams! I have had the huge pleasure of meeting Salley twice, once for dinner when a very new psychologist/Jungian enthusiast in 2001. We had dinner with our same mentor Dr A S now in Corfu. And another meeting in Hatchards in Piccadilly 2021 when she signed The Gardener for my then 15 year old son Alfie or Alfred as she rightly wrote and insisted! (an Alfred appears in the book). ! Her talk with McGilchrist whom I admire hugely, put me onto you and your work. Please please set up a few talks with him. The SV/DBH talks have been terrific. Roland, H of C in photographs, and another 4 or 5 DBH books bought. The Beauty of the infinite arrived an hour ago. Plus Alice in Wonderland and Wind in the Willows are a joy to re read. Of course I'm not an compulsive or obsessive being nor an idealist! But it's been a real gift to 'know' you and your work. I loved Henry Weinfield. Can't get his Mallarmé translation. All terrific. Thank you Dr DBH. Much gratitude. John Stewart. Clapham Junction. London. UK
Many thanks, and yes, I know the Nabokov volume. I never let anything Nabokovian slip past me unpurchased, whether I should or not. A conversation with Iain has been recorded and will soon appear.
Just to say a huge thank you for your response and the link to Weinfield's Mallarme translation, which I clicked and had delivered. I was at McGilchrist's conference on Saturday and recommend his work to all as fascinatingly impressive, non dogmatic and very rich in style and sheer scholarly output.
Like when I awaiting with excitement to see and hear Vladimir Horowitz the great pianist give two recitals in London in 1982, so I await with real enthusiasm and excitement your talk with Dr Iain McGilchrist. Any dates yet? Lastly Henry Weinfield is right saying that you truly are master of the essay. They are exquisite and if your potential readers are not golf fans, (or equally just open minded!) then they have a huge treat in store (tears of laughter) in Golf and the Metaphysics of Morals, plus Obama and the Lama, essays on Bruckner, Mark Twain and volumes more of sumptuous delicacies. I have a number of your works now and must proceed this rainy London night with starting Roland in Moonlight! It seems loved by all. Thank you for enriching my life in just 6 weeks of knowing your talks and writings. Japanese ghost stories, Dawkins, singing to Salley Vickers like an Irish baritone who has had a drop too many and discussing AI, philosophy of mind and fairies. And the other night I sat down and read The Wind in the Willows for 2 hours! Perhaps I was a better psychologist/psychotherapist (me thinks) the next day than had I read Marie-Louise von Frantz or Bruno Bettelheim. So thank you Prof.DBH. A true gift. Have a great week. John Stewart London. UK.
Dear Prof DBH, Regarding Jung's work. Can I access your review/essay on The Red Book anywhere ? I'd be most grateful. Sonu Shamdasani felt that R.F.Hull's translation of the original Complete Works of CGJ never read well (unlike Strachey's Freud) and Sonu believes this was probably down to Hull being an atheist and not really grasping the essence of such 101 religious words/terms such as 'soul' and 'Spirit'. Despite Jung's 'apprival'. Do you read Jung in the original German ? And lastly what happened to Alfred Adler? In the UK he is as good as unknown. Pragmatist, dynamic thinker, dreams,good socialist, social reformer,child guidance clinics, sibling rivalry etc. Died in Aberdeen in 1937. His Social Interest may allow us to accept change without resorting to "fake news" or "radical p/c woke". Jung had great respect for Adler and his power drive ideas. Spirit with healthy power can transform and transcend. Viktor Frankl. Bonhoeffer. Bill Wilson. Mandela. Solzhenitsyn. Sakarov. Florensky. Bulgakov. Are the talks stopping over the summer? You need a break! But try not to leave us for too long. You have dramatically invigorated my life. And that is no exaggeration. Thanks again! Rest and write well and so pleased Roland recovered. Emergency vets? No fun. If you come to London feel free to call 0044 7884 312 842 and be happy to chat over lunch with you and my son aged 16 and a Leaves in the Wind subscriber and your wife and family. I know Salley slightly. We had dinner together with Anthony Stevens and at Hatchards, Piccadilly. We had the same supervisor Dr Anthony Stevens, now in Corfu. For references! BW John (John Stewart).
Our main evidence for YHWH's marriage to Asherah in the early Israelite religion is references to "YHWH and his Asherah" on inscriptions in ancient Israel from the 12th to 8th centuries BC. I know some people chafe at the suppression of the divine feminine as Judaism develops, but it's quite clearly still present both in YHWH himself and in Wisdom, who seems a much more theologically interesting than Asherah.
Also, ancient Israelite religion really sucked and I think suppressing the cults of Asherah and Ba'al is a fair tradeoff for getting rid of human sacrifice.
Well, I'm assuming the two actions were intertwined: getting rid of human sacrifice seems to have involved blaming the other gods for it, and thus tying it to idolatry. Dishonest? Maybe. But I can't say could have come up with a better plan as a prophet in the 600s BC.
Yes, but Asherah seems to have been around long after Israelitic-Canaanite divides over such things--though obviously there's evidence from the prophets that the bad habits may have lingered longer everywhere.
I think you are being too literal here, Tim (if I may?) It's the mythic aspects of Asherah that were probably originally present in the divine that interest me . To be sure, her cult does remain around in the OT books although mostly when being savagely obliterated by one of the more Yahwehcentric and fanatical kings although, as you suggest, some of the feminine aspects become assimilated into Yahweh's personality. But the Yahweh cult could be pretty ferocious, with widespread mutialtions and obliterations and increasingly rule-bound, so I think there's a narrowing in the concept of the divine as well as certain gains which allow for the development of monotheism. I am not actually pitching this form a feminist angle.
The conversation is wonderful! Graceful and somewhat moody. Despite many good things spoken of by SV and you in elegant manners, I, as a being of my vulgarity, was drawn to the impressively unforgettable expression "sublimely ridiculous", pronounced to describe Daniel Dennett in the end. Then, that immediately motivated me to view the archived video of Dennett interviewed by Robert Wright in 2003 on Nonzero Newsletter; "On Consciousness, Free Will, and Purpose".
It is true that Dennett does not take consciousness seriously, because consciousness is just a shadow of brain according to him. No one is immune to analyses of behavioral science which can understand you more than you do yourself and you can be detailed on an encyclopedic level about you as a sole subject. The interview is interesting and I also grasped what is about non-phenomenological atheism, I think. Dennett has an aura of non-dieu-authority. Wright is sharp and crisp.
All aspects of spirituality could be, for Dennett, just equivalent to parenting with pedagogic psychology. In the whole universe, there is no non-contingency in addition. Evolution happened because it happened. His view seems to be radical, but the base of his rational bio-psychology could be said as ubiquitous in different terms and expressions. There is no discussion of fairy tales while Lizards' pain and their consciousness are discussed as well as whether a rock can be conscious about the gravity, in addition to grain of sand in a considerable length of time by a viewer's psychological account. But if there were a talk about fairy tales, what would have been, I wonder?
I have not listened yet, but I am looking forward to doing so! I enjoyed your first dialogue with her very much - she seems to be a lovely human being.
What a delightful discussion! Conversations between SV and DBH should happen at least on quarterly basis (and even more frequently, if possible). Salley Vickers is not only a smart, educated, and quite charming interlocutor; she also gets DBH to open up on some topics he doesn’t usually discuss in public spaces (like fairies and prophetic dreams).
As regards Andersen, perhaps some of his tales must be kept away from kids, but surely every child must read The Emperor’s New Clothes, The Ugly Duckling, and The Snow Queen, else they won’t understand a great number of references and homages in subsequent works of literature and entertainment media.
On a side note, Ms. Vickers, if you are reading this, I just want to tell you how much I liked The Gardener. The narrative, the style, and the whole ensemble of characters were all fantastic (in all senses). Phyllis is probably my favorite and I really hope you have met someone in your life who has served as an inspiration for her. Although I strongly disagree with her that the lion should never lie down with the lamb. (I am simply not brave enough to accept a world where natural evil isn’t meant to be overcome in the eschatological horizon.)
I love it when you discuss OT stuff, Dr. Hart. I was taught to be a crude literalist and was told the OT was the perfect revelation without flaw and cannot be questioned. These discussions are very helpful for us. I hope you know.
the conversations are great as always many thanks
I’ve been listening to this conversation while I exercise as of late; I just got to the part about dreams.
This sort of thing always reminds me of the great mathematician Ramanujan, who unarguably had one of the most frighteningly formidable intellects in the history of the field. Apparently, and I’ve not looked too deeply into the matter, he also received some theorems in his dreams from the family god—great scrolls of elliptic integrals unrolling before his eyes and such. It’s curious business.
I can't get so much as a whisper in response to prayer and other people's gods are handing out mathematical theorems in dreams? That Galilean peasant better come through in the eschaton, or I'm going to be very cross.
I like these conservations.
I finally listened to the last 20 minutes of this lovely conversation. I’m glad I did, for it contained some of my favorite moments. I will always feel some gratitude toward Alex Rosenberg. I was wracking my brain, casting about, trying to understand how he could reconcile his views on intentionality with the (presumably intentional) act of writing a book, when I discovered an essay from a wonderful writer I’d never heard of before . . . one David Bentley Hart. Thanks again, Alex!
A lovely conversation! Thank you!
Are you familiar with Nabokov's book on dreaming as premonitions. He loathed Freud and my profession in general which I get. The rift between Jung and Freud still acts out! Not near the civility even between Russell and Copleston! But Nabokov was heavily influenced by an English physicist (I think...) but sadly the books must have gone with thousands of others due to lack of space...like you and Rowan Williams! I have had the huge pleasure of meeting Salley twice, once for dinner when a very new psychologist/Jungian enthusiast in 2001. We had dinner with our same mentor Dr A S now in Corfu. And another meeting in Hatchards in Piccadilly 2021 when she signed The Gardener for my then 15 year old son Alfie or Alfred as she rightly wrote and insisted! (an Alfred appears in the book). ! Her talk with McGilchrist whom I admire hugely, put me onto you and your work. Please please set up a few talks with him. The SV/DBH talks have been terrific. Roland, H of C in photographs, and another 4 or 5 DBH books bought. The Beauty of the infinite arrived an hour ago. Plus Alice in Wonderland and Wind in the Willows are a joy to re read. Of course I'm not an compulsive or obsessive being nor an idealist! But it's been a real gift to 'know' you and your work. I loved Henry Weinfield. Can't get his Mallarmé translation. All terrific. Thank you Dr DBH. Much gratitude. John Stewart. Clapham Junction. London. UK
Many thanks, and yes, I know the Nabokov volume. I never let anything Nabokovian slip past me unpurchased, whether I should or not. A conversation with Iain has been recorded and will soon appear.
Oh: assuming that you're in the UK, as seems to be the case: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Collected-Poems-Stephane-Mallarme/dp/0520268148/ref=sr_1_14?crid=2XMDY68HVBN22&keywords=mallarme&qid=1681318748&s=books&sprefix=mallarme%2Cstripbooks%2C168&sr=1-14
Just to say a huge thank you for your response and the link to Weinfield's Mallarme translation, which I clicked and had delivered. I was at McGilchrist's conference on Saturday and recommend his work to all as fascinatingly impressive, non dogmatic and very rich in style and sheer scholarly output.
Like when I awaiting with excitement to see and hear Vladimir Horowitz the great pianist give two recitals in London in 1982, so I await with real enthusiasm and excitement your talk with Dr Iain McGilchrist. Any dates yet? Lastly Henry Weinfield is right saying that you truly are master of the essay. They are exquisite and if your potential readers are not golf fans, (or equally just open minded!) then they have a huge treat in store (tears of laughter) in Golf and the Metaphysics of Morals, plus Obama and the Lama, essays on Bruckner, Mark Twain and volumes more of sumptuous delicacies. I have a number of your works now and must proceed this rainy London night with starting Roland in Moonlight! It seems loved by all. Thank you for enriching my life in just 6 weeks of knowing your talks and writings. Japanese ghost stories, Dawkins, singing to Salley Vickers like an Irish baritone who has had a drop too many and discussing AI, philosophy of mind and fairies. And the other night I sat down and read The Wind in the Willows for 2 hours! Perhaps I was a better psychologist/psychotherapist (me thinks) the next day than had I read Marie-Louise von Frantz or Bruno Bettelheim. So thank you Prof.DBH. A true gift. Have a great week. John Stewart London. UK.
You're very generous with your praise. I blush. (I also concur, but I don't dare say so.)
Dear Prof DBH, Regarding Jung's work. Can I access your review/essay on The Red Book anywhere ? I'd be most grateful. Sonu Shamdasani felt that R.F.Hull's translation of the original Complete Works of CGJ never read well (unlike Strachey's Freud) and Sonu believes this was probably down to Hull being an atheist and not really grasping the essence of such 101 religious words/terms such as 'soul' and 'Spirit'. Despite Jung's 'apprival'. Do you read Jung in the original German ? And lastly what happened to Alfred Adler? In the UK he is as good as unknown. Pragmatist, dynamic thinker, dreams,good socialist, social reformer,child guidance clinics, sibling rivalry etc. Died in Aberdeen in 1937. His Social Interest may allow us to accept change without resorting to "fake news" or "radical p/c woke". Jung had great respect for Adler and his power drive ideas. Spirit with healthy power can transform and transcend. Viktor Frankl. Bonhoeffer. Bill Wilson. Mandela. Solzhenitsyn. Sakarov. Florensky. Bulgakov. Are the talks stopping over the summer? You need a break! But try not to leave us for too long. You have dramatically invigorated my life. And that is no exaggeration. Thanks again! Rest and write well and so pleased Roland recovered. Emergency vets? No fun. If you come to London feel free to call 0044 7884 312 842 and be happy to chat over lunch with you and my son aged 16 and a Leaves in the Wind subscriber and your wife and family. I know Salley slightly. We had dinner together with Anthony Stevens and at Hatchards, Piccadilly. We had the same supervisor Dr Anthony Stevens, now in Corfu. For references! BW John (John Stewart).
Our main evidence for YHWH's marriage to Asherah in the early Israelite religion is references to "YHWH and his Asherah" on inscriptions in ancient Israel from the 12th to 8th centuries BC. I know some people chafe at the suppression of the divine feminine as Judaism develops, but it's quite clearly still present both in YHWH himself and in Wisdom, who seems a much more theologically interesting than Asherah.
Also, ancient Israelite religion really sucked and I think suppressing the cults of Asherah and Ba'al is a fair tradeoff for getting rid of human sacrifice.
Don’t, however, fall prey to the post hoc ergo propter hoc error.
Well, I'm assuming the two actions were intertwined: getting rid of human sacrifice seems to have involved blaming the other gods for it, and thus tying it to idolatry. Dishonest? Maybe. But I can't say could have come up with a better plan as a prophet in the 600s BC.
Yes, but Asherah seems to have been around long after Israelitic-Canaanite divides over such things--though obviously there's evidence from the prophets that the bad habits may have lingered longer everywhere.
I think you are being too literal here, Tim (if I may?) It's the mythic aspects of Asherah that were probably originally present in the divine that interest me . To be sure, her cult does remain around in the OT books although mostly when being savagely obliterated by one of the more Yahwehcentric and fanatical kings although, as you suggest, some of the feminine aspects become assimilated into Yahweh's personality. But the Yahweh cult could be pretty ferocious, with widespread mutialtions and obliterations and increasingly rule-bound, so I think there's a narrowing in the concept of the divine as well as certain gains which allow for the development of monotheism. I am not actually pitching this form a feminist angle.
The conversation is wonderful! Graceful and somewhat moody. Despite many good things spoken of by SV and you in elegant manners, I, as a being of my vulgarity, was drawn to the impressively unforgettable expression "sublimely ridiculous", pronounced to describe Daniel Dennett in the end. Then, that immediately motivated me to view the archived video of Dennett interviewed by Robert Wright in 2003 on Nonzero Newsletter; "On Consciousness, Free Will, and Purpose".
It is true that Dennett does not take consciousness seriously, because consciousness is just a shadow of brain according to him. No one is immune to analyses of behavioral science which can understand you more than you do yourself and you can be detailed on an encyclopedic level about you as a sole subject. The interview is interesting and I also grasped what is about non-phenomenological atheism, I think. Dennett has an aura of non-dieu-authority. Wright is sharp and crisp.
All aspects of spirituality could be, for Dennett, just equivalent to parenting with pedagogic psychology. In the whole universe, there is no non-contingency in addition. Evolution happened because it happened. His view seems to be radical, but the base of his rational bio-psychology could be said as ubiquitous in different terms and expressions. There is no discussion of fairy tales while Lizards' pain and their consciousness are discussed as well as whether a rock can be conscious about the gravity, in addition to grain of sand in a considerable length of time by a viewer's psychological account. But if there were a talk about fairy tales, what would have been, I wonder?
"Further up and further in" is the precise phrase in Lewis.
It would have been better as Higher up and further in. Ah well…
I was reminded of this episode of This American Life and its account of a certain production of Peter Pan. Brings tears to my eyes every time.
https://www.thisamericanlife.org/699/fiasco
I have not listened yet, but I am looking forward to doing so! I enjoyed your first dialogue with her very much - she seems to be a lovely human being.