DO WE HAVE ENOUGH WITH PETERSON AND DOOLITTLE? So really, it’s one thing to argu

DO WE HAVE ENOUGH WITH PETERSON AND DOOLITTLE?

So really, it’s one thing to argue via positivia (myth and literature) like Peterson (who is amazing). It’s another to argue via negativa (law). As Josh has said – the law isn’t really inspiring. The power of it is. The moral license of it is. But it isn’t ‘spiritual’ in the sense that it invokes that feeling we call spirituality (the pack response) – that abandonment of reason and reliance on intuition – where we can ‘feel’ our way through with joy what we must think our way through with reason.

But you can’t prevent existential bads with positiva, any more than you can create spiritual goods with negativa.

If we took a sort of Janus Faced approach, (Arrows and Olive Branches) we find the ‘balance’ between positive and negative.

I wonder if I could get this all thru to him? He has so many pieces but he is, at heart a literary rather than analytic thinker.

( Dr Jordan B Peterson, Professor of Psychology )