Unfinished Essay ("the Music of the World")

The Music of the World.

What is the music of the world?

Music, from Plato, has been understood in a philosophical context as an archetypal example of an emergent phenomenon that arises out of certain processes without a direct means of cause and effect. The intangible music, as it were, rises out of the very tangible and material structure of the instrument. Both truly exist, but one has come into being almost out of nothing. It has not been materially constructed like an instrument or a piece of furniture. It has “emerged.”

The Marxist conception of evil, or the origins of evil and suffering, can serve to demonstrate what I mean:

In the Marxist view, man is born good, or at least morally neutral. As he enters into a market system and begins to engage in trade, however, something horrible starts to happen. Each time he makes an exchange, it is as if a demon leaps out of the process (like a note of music leaps out of a guitar chord that someone has strummed) and scurries away.

Moment by moment, it’s trivial matter to control or suppress these demons. But as the market grows more and more complex, as the transactions grow larger and larger in scale and consequence, the exchange of goods and services begins to produce creatures that are more powerful than human beings.

Man at no point has willingly made a mistake, man has at no point willingly committed a sin… but the demons have multiplied to the point that they outnumber and overpower their masters—and the demon’s desires are totally contrary to those of the human beings who created him.

So it comes about that money, which was made to serve man, becomes man’s master.

It is as if a man were to create a musical instrument that produced music that was so beautiful and melodious that he became hypnotized by it and controlled by his own creation.

Clearly this conception of evil is directly opposed to the Christian one.

It is so seductive because it does not have any concept of responsibility (which is very boring and onerous, after all, and which the great majority of people would like to get rid of if they could).

Sin is a moral mistake, that we freely make of our own volition.

How does this concept apply to the ideas of Jung and Jordan Peterson?

Jung often reads more like a mystic than a scientist. At moments, he demonstrates an astonishing religiosity.

Modern, secular people who would otherwise be outraged by religious fundamentalism (or at least religious literalism) are not disturbed by this fervent religiosity. Why?

It could earnestly be argued that Jung believed in demons and spirits. But the Jungian view moves religious cosmology from the outer world to the inner world.

Here is how a demon comes into existence under Jung’s thought:

A man takes part in some event or behavior. This event or behavior produces a mental impression on him, which is reinforced in his mind if it happens again. Across societies, across the great mass of humanity, enough people engage in certain behaviors that they begin to solidify into archetypal concepts.

When many people discuss a single event, only the common elements of that event survive.

What I’m getting at: Jordan Peterson’s conception of Christ as “harmony.” Great Lakes, what a dodge!