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 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
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.
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 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
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.
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.
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.