skells @skells@social.cleverlibre.org

@MisterRogersSnapped @SneedsterSpeedster "Thinking, Fast and Slow" has very rigourous science behind it.

There's a view today that something can't be a science without quantitative methods - the reality is that formulae are often used to obfuscate bullshit. Search "replication crisis."

A careful reading of Jung shows that he was a rigorous thinker. His investigations produced questionable and disturbing results - it's a rare person who can look those results in the eye and integrate them into their life.

His is a subjective opinion and has its idiosyncrasies - as he is first to attest. That no one has really followed upon his heels with the same insight is a great shame. You only get 5 or 6 of his quality in a century though, perhaps it's to be expected.

Girard is very good, more anthropology than psychology but he is as unflinching and rigourous as Jung; perhaps without his intuitive genius.

@SneedsterSpeedster @MisterRogersSnapped

Jung is too based for modern academics

@MisterRogersSnapped I highly recommend "the Essential Jung," covers all his work chronologically and is very well edited.

Wait for a quiet spell to start reading it though, I was finding excuses to read it constantly.

@MisterRogersSnapped Jung - Modern Man in Search of a Soul

Gives a snapshot of his main themes in his ~middle period, so you get more of a feel for his method than his earlier, more empirical work and his later, more "finished" perspectives.

Packs quite a punch too, don't think I've read many books which provoke the same intensity of vertigo and soul-searching. Always cuts close to the bone.

gods I miss trial by combat

https://youtu.be/6Vd0M30RoI4

it's been too long and you know it

@p @11112011 @fm https://youtu.be/kiVVzxoPTtg

@KlausSchwabBTC I will continue to use leverage, thanks for the advice though