At age 48, I’ve started reading the Dune series. I’m an educator who has taught History, Government and Politics for 23 years. You should study philosophy and be an educator. You have a very good perspective on human behavior and are an excellent communicator. You have great emotional intelligence. I could listen to you all day.
Well, yes. You may say these videos are educational in nature. But you could definitely do a stint in any faculty. But don't stop doing videos or writing too.
He has a good handle on explaining the ideas of other people. You educators are so weak minded. Is it not strange how the downfall of society comes from the people that educate it? I enjoy Quinn's videos a lot. But the sycophant comments from people like you make me sick.
You DO NOT need to apologize for anything. You Dune series is beyond words. I cannot express how much I have enjoyed watching the fruits of your exemplary videos. Would love to see your take on the Harkonnens . Not sure if my grammar is correct but thanks again.
The big attraction for me is his voice and the fabulous artwork he's chosen for every video. Love it. ✔️ There are so many passionate fans of Dune out there. Hope the new movie won't be a disappointment for them. That Bladerunner sequel lacked 'soul' to me. Did not interest me enough to go for several viewings of it.
Dude. Your Dune pieces are the best Dune RU-vid content to come into existence in years, maybe ever. Please do not stop, all your edits and musings are incredibly interesting and well made. I will not stop talking about your channel to anyone who’ll listen!
quite literally . it has been decades since i read dune and honestly i wasnt that interested in any of the politics etc he talks about buut he makes them fascinating
I was in the 4th grade when I read Dune for the first time. I was hooked on scifi after that. I read thousands of books since then and few have come close to Dune. Robert Jordan's and Tolkens works in fantasy are on par. Clark's stuff is great too as is Asminoffs. Thanks for making the videos.
It’s hard to say religion and government doesn’t work. All the great empires of human history up until the Enlightenment where a blend of religion and politics. Not justifying any of the horrors done by any of them. But they did work. The argument that having secular government is the only way to have a just, peaceful society I would put forth the USSR and the USA. Both secular governments. Both responsible for 10’s of millions of deaths in the 20 the century. Seems that religion wasn’t the problem.
@@Ragnarok540 crusades were justified and the numbers of dead are no way near what the post enlightment project societies did. In fact just look at the reign of terror on France and look at what humans truly do when they believe their own hype
You make great content. To be honest with the level of work you put in and editing you do I'm not shocked at all people love them. Plus it a testament to Frank Herberts work that you can make these great videos. Keep up the awsome work.
I first read the Dune saga when I was entering my teenage years. It changed my life. To me, the overarching themes of Dune were soaked into every piece of the story, every page, every dialogue, to the point that every word built this image of what Frank Herbert had in mind. It made me think about everything differently, and I am so thankful for these books that I don't know if any language can extend the gratitude I feel. And to see someone reexamining the books gives me that feeling of eating homemade cookies in front of the fireplace as a child, a comfort that is beyond explanation. Thank you for doing this and please continue as long as you can.
God emperor of dune is the deepest in the series. If you read it with an open mind and dwell on the concepts of the human condition in it, the book will make look at your own beliefs and ideas think about your choices.
I read Dune as a senior in high school - in 1983 - and completely missed the point that Frank Herbert was trying to make. I started re-reading the series recently after seeing the movie and got a bit more. Watching your videos have caused me to go back and read the series for the third time. Your incredible analysis has completely changed the way I interpret the novel. It's almost embarrassing. I'm a college graduate and old enough to he your mother and you have schooled me. Thank you.
Your videos are what is getting me into Dune, I have never read the books or seen the movies but the themes and storylines resonate so strongly with me and I love your analysis
As someone who read DUNE (for the first time) back in the 1970s, and who never wants the awe to fade away, I'm truly grateful to IOIAF for it's treatment of the DUNE universe. Much luv to you all.
I first read it as a high school student in 1965 when it appeared in the local library. I've read it many times since, as well as the other five books.
I was here for the ASOIAF but I love that you started the Dune series! After I catch up with ASOIAF I’m going to pick up Dune and that is all thanks to you. Same with all the Lovecraft lore. Barnes and noble make a good buck off of me all thanks to you! Keep it up ❤️
Although late to the party, I wanna thank you for your Dune content. You're a big reason I looked into the series. Also, cause of you, when ever I read it, it's your voice I imagine reading it. Thank you for such amazing content, thank you for your deep insight. A Fellow Writer 💙
Just discovered your channel and subscribed. As someone who is discovering Sci Fi in his later year, Dune has completely engulfed me. I can't tell you enough how much I appreciate your work. Thank you.
Planet of the Atheists Yup. The first Dune book is so dense and thick it could easily be spread to three films. This is one of the rare cases where it wouldn’t bother me if they did that.
I first got into your channel about a year ago because of ASOIAF and thoroughly enjoyed the content and had often heard of the Dune series but never checked it out and I'm ashamed I didn't. It's magnificent, just like your narrative voice haha. Your pronunciation is just fine and if people are paying attention to that then why are they watching in the first place? I can say I've been waiting for that previous compendium of book 2 and am now reading the books as well. Solid content man and please don't be discouraged by critics and naysayers. The views speak for themselves, we love Dune, we love GoT, we love IdeasOfIceAndFire.
First of all, I want to tell you that I really appreciate your hard work at creating these videos. Thanks! I have to say that I was drawn to Dune because my father had the first four books, and I had the opportunity to read it for a high school class. I loved it because of the world Herbert created--it was so very vivid and imaginative. So I enjoyed it for the escapist value. But I never really thought a whole lot about the depth of his critique of the modern world. Sure, I thought about the petroleum economy and its political implications, but never really gave much thought to his ideas about politics and especially religious fanaticism. And part of that comes from my background as a member of a fundamentalist religious sect that genuinely believes its worldview is superior to all others, and that is waging its own kind of jihad to gain social, political, and especially doctrinal ascendancy. The depth of my devotion to this sect caused me to torment myself for years as a gay man, and to reject and discount my own rational critique of its approach to the LGBT experience. As I have unraveled myself from this worldview over the past several years, I have come to see the importance of some of Herbert's themes in critiquing America in the 20th and even 21st centuries. That it really doesn't matter how righteous a group thinks it is, fanaticism is dangerous to civilization. That a secular government is the only way to preserve freedoms for all people. Now, we have our own political problems beyond the religious culture wars in America--especially the dominance of global corporations and the rise of an oligarchic class. Herbert has some important things to say about these things, as well. And the stuff from God Emperor regarding human stagnation is fascinating and thought-provoking.
Personally I've heard about Dune but never paid it any attention but your videos have definately given me reason to at least read the first book some time. Seems like an interesting universe, and with Dennis Villeneuve praising it so heavilly it really must be quite good. Also love the Lovecraft angle you often have in your videos, perhaps you can focus on that as well for new video ideas exploring that mythos universe some more.
You are SO thoughtful. Thank you for this episode. Not only are you exposing to life the epic Dune series...but you are bringing new life to this weighty topics. I have an amazing appreciation for your passion.
Thank you for getting me into Dune! Saw the movie and had no idea what was happening, then I watched your Dune videos and now I'm hooked! Halfway through the first book and excited to read the rest.
I actually think that your pronunciation of Alia makes more sense, because you make her name sound like Aaliya which is a word of some significance in Islam and Middle Eastern culture. And the Fremen are strongly influenced by certain strands of Islamic thought (Mahdism obviously, but there's a reason they're also called "Zen SUNNI")
@@husainabdulwahaab6154 I think Herbert was trying to make us question our notions about prophets, saviors, and elite organizations in general. The Islamic theming is pretty obvious a lot of the time, probably cause its set on a desert planet, but there's references to other faiths as well. It's less an attack on Islam and more an attack on blind faith in general.
I think you appreciate that both George Martin and Frank Herbert have a ‘Spenglerian’ view of history (see Oswald Spengler -The Decline of the West). Excellent work as usual, you currently have over 4 million views on your Ultimate Guide to Dune, very much deserved.
Keep up the good work! I really appreciate that you are expanding to other books. I'm in it for the commentary and insight so this a great logical next step.
Your videos are truly great, people can feel your passion for these books and it shines through. I'd probably listen to any video you make on any fantasy/sci-fi series. The Dune videos are one of the best works on your channel and whole yt. Thanks for all the research!!
Facts. You're an amazing source of creative interpretation and information. Fuck the haters. I've loved Dune since I read it at 15(?). Reread it more than any other series. And you nail it.
Enjoying your videos! One of the problems with attempting to avoid mixing religion and government is that it is ultimately impossible. Secular humanism immediately becomes its own religion. Various offshoots of marxism immediately become religious. The vacuum gets filled. BigGovernment takes the place of God. The old priesthood is simply replaced with a new priesthood. The old oracles of revelation of great truth are just replaced with different oracles of great truth. The prophets of old are replaced with a new kind of prophet. Those who used to be powerful are replaced with a different group that takes power. In the end, the era of self-governance and relative freedom that the enlightenment was supposed to provide us is simply replaced by a new authoritarian-and-totalitarian statism. When God dies, someone has to take his place. And it wont be purely secular. It may aim at secularism but such a vacuum is impossible. It is just a trading of theism for pantheism, Aquinas with Plotinus, and some variation of neo-platonism or gnosticism and multiple forms of occultism. Get rid of God and seven demons take his place.
Good point. We seem to be seeing this in America right now. The United States is supposedly becoming more secular and less religious. While it’s true that church membership/attendance is dwindling, people are ultimately filling that void with something else. Partisan politics is the main thing that comes to mind here. Politics is now becoming the lens by which we view and interpret every aspect of our lives. In my opinion, it’s not a coincidence that our politics have become more extreme while our spiritual/religious ways are fading away. This definitely explains why seemingly everything is now hyper-politicized.
Subscribed! Loving Dune currently, and right then you start this series! Awesome! Can't wait for your video to God Emperor of Dune, I just hope you'll talk more analysis and interpretation there, somewhat less quoting then in the other "ultimate guide to Dune" vids :) Anyway, keep it up! Also, I don't think your pronounciation is so bad at all. sure, some things might be different, but some of the official audiobooks screw it up waaaay worse ;) I think you do a great job and enjoy it immensly! Edit: Already watched you for ASOIAF content, was shocked to realize just now that I hadn't subscribed to you yet. Well, I hope you'll take it as encouragement for more Dune content. Pave the first wave before the oncoming adaptations make it mainstream ;)
Your channel got me into Dune and I'm now going back to see your other videos and insights since reading the series and the first film has just come out - some of your societal observations are just increasingly relevant in 2021 and honestly the fact that Dune's criticisms of our society is even more increasingly relevant is horrifying 👀 love the channel and Dune series, do not love how fast we are declining as a species ❤️
Same I thank this channel for getting me interested in Dune before the movie came out. Before this I was just aware of Dune and some basic facts about it.
Mixing government and religion produces an inherently explosive situation that perfectly suits the long term goals of _apocalyptic_ religions like Christianity and Islam.
I agree with you. I didn't realize it when I first read Dune in 1972. It would be great if we taught skepticism in High School. The class would start by revealing and explaining the basic con games. It would end with the problem with mixing religion and government.
I have done public speaking for years and how you enunciate the words of these books is very clear and crisp. Your voice is very enticing, and tell those that are so pretty to GFTS.
Thank you for doing this, I’ve never really known about Dune, but with the trailer for the new dune of which I’m really excited to see, I’ve wanted to learn about this universe. So I’ve been binging your channel and I’m hooked in even more. Thanks again
Thoughtful analysis, but problems with your conclusions. Dune Messiah published 1969. Jonestown massacre 1978. Herbert was not echoing current events, he was an even deeper thinker than you realize.
I think Frank Herbert recognized a pattern in human behavior, Jonestown is just one example. One that he did site later on as I showed in my Dune Messiah video.
There were plenty of similar deadly cults before Jim Jones, it is just Jonestown was one of the first to get massive media coverage and to significantly involve a politician well known in the US. If you are interested in cults down the centuries, check out the Parcast podcast Cults.
@@brentoncarter4275 Agreed. Thus "an even deeper thinker." Quinn is a first rate analyst of quality fiction, I think he just choose a slightly off example this time.
@@djolds1 why? He posed an example of a cult, a cult which most of us remember vividly. YOU are emphasizing the temporal frame of reference. Quinn was only invoking current events, a framing you imposed on the subject matter, insofar as to say this is what humans are prone to. It's a characteristic of humanity.
If you watch the Dune series and the Dune film, a lot of the words are pronounced completely differently! It's based on a book so who's to say how to pronounce Harkonnen or Chani?
i have not yet finished to watch the video yet and think you have a great voice and true passion but to me you said he is critisizing things when he his not ! he is just explaining how things are ! for me its a big difference ! he was a philosopher of modern times and not a part taker in anything . he as a child offerd me more understanding on theology, geography, physics, biology, polotics, respect than any other books or teachers i ever had. and his philosophy is still very much part of my daily life
This guy seems to miss a big point about frank Herbert's vision here. It was obvious he was extremely weary of and suspicious of science as the foundational philosophy for a functioning society. Paul's story undoubtedly cautions against theocracy, but so too does the orange Catholic bible, in that science became theocracy and the cymeks made themselves into immortal gods. So if science isn't the answer and religion isn't the answer, then what is? Well, we get that answer in the second trilogy. The golden path is the path of self development and self sufficiency. Duncan Idaho becomes the true messiah as he has evolved personally into the lone being who can bridge science and religion in a meaningful way. Idaho's personal development brings about utopia. That being said, we have been conditioned in all other books to be skeptical of such messianic figures and a if given an appropriate length of time, I'm sure we would grow to hate the new messiah too. The whole point is that new and improved states of being never stop the human need for further development. Utopia is just a dream: an amiable if unachievable goal. Humans aren't meant to be content. We have but two choices, pain (which is the golden path) and boredom (which is what the God emperor fostered during his 3500 years).
@@brentoncarter4275 pretty glib and simplistic assessment. Bad things are bad. How about hot things are hot or fun things are fun. That extremes are bad is hardly the take away. Leto II's extreme transformation lead to true progress and saves humanity from itself. Without extremes, frank Herbert's universe would have been utterly devastated. Wisdom comes from personal development and courage especially in the extreme. Paul was too cowardly to be as extreme as he needed to be. Leto was not. In many cases, the extreme proved dangerous but necessary.
I disagree with some of your points on science. Science has many benefits, true. But it lacks a moral structure, and then many theroies are taught as dogmatic thought. As science replaces religious and cultural traditions, it does nothing to fill in the gap of societal morality and methods of life. Science is a useful tool. But it is just that: A specialized tool that can't replace other tools. One does not use a hammer where screwdriver may be used, and a hammer can never fill the need of a screwdriver. Please think about this critically, and you will begin to understand.
If you need religion as an external reference for morality, if you do not have an intrinsic morality based upon pure empathy, then you make yourself dependent on that set of rules laid out by the religion in question. Thus you give up your own responsibility, your agency and your free will and hand it over to someone or something. You are nothing more than a mere tool for the religion and your understanding of the world also gets limited by just that since you are being told what is acceptable and what is not. What a lot of people do not understand is that religion is just another method of gaining control, of exerting dominance and as a way to rule over others. Not so much in the way that the priests of a religion can force you to adhere to a certain pattern of behavior, at least not by means of worldly repercussions (or to be more precise - in the west and nowadays that is, it has been done and is - to a certain extend - still part of the life of some theocracies and fundamentalistic states). They can and do utilize fear however. The fear of the afterlife, of eternal condemnation or other forms of punishment of you fall out of line. In most religions you have to accept the dogmatic "truth" that is spread via whatever holy scripture or teaching it tries to push onto you. As they are dogmatic they are not up for discussion, and every deviance from those teachings are more or less heresy and must be squashed. It also has no qualms about using pressure from those around you to keep you in line. The kicker in the whole mess of religions is, though, that every religion claims to be in some form or another the work of a divine entity that through different means channeled its seemingly infinite wisdom through a mortal being to influence us in one way or another. The Abrahamic God JHW did it at least thrice and now those three religions have a - let's say strained - relationship, with the newcomer not being very candid about its disdain towards the older two. As expected, all of them claim to be the ultimate truth, the only truth and every other truth is just a fabrication, a danger to the truth contained within this very religion. If the themes between those religions align, then it is clearly a misinterpretation, a lesser copy, a twisted form of the only real truth. And at some random point said entity just stops doing anything. Interestingly there is a strong correlation between the number of miracles and works of gods and the amount of knowledge a society acquires. The higher the amount of people who can read and write, the fewer miracles. The higher the average level of education, the fewer miracles. Until, at a certain point, they miraculously disappear once a society, a culture starts to question the teachings of a religion. At that point a religion has lost its worldly control over its believers leading to its decline. Science, however, has no dogma. It has a set of rules to prevent it from having a dogma. Yes, sure, there are a metric ton of scientists who grew up with the firm conviction that things are a certain way and that have a very, very, very hard time giving up those ideas. That is not necessarily a bad thing, as this usually only holds true for theories that have been established a long time ago and had withstood the tests of time. This just keeps some random hypothesis whose math somehow works out for a fringe case in check. If you come up with something that fundamentally changes the understanding of our world you better have some convincing arguments and the math and data to prove it. Einstein did something like that with the SRT and ART. When they came out they were widely disputed, but the math explained a lot of weird phenomena that had scientists scratching their heads for centuries, and got experimentally confirmed as well. And other theories are under constant examination, have been put through so much scrutiny its almost comical. Quantum mechanics are one such field where everybody just would LOVE to disprove it because it is counter intuitive like nothing else and kinda "messy" for some mathematical purists. It's all about chances and possibilities, nothing is rigid in it, and just the act of observation changes the observed object. But these things are not conjured out of the blue. They are not dictated by some supreme being. They are the results of measurements and conjecture, of hypothesis and experimentation, of logic and imagination. They do not need theological assistance because science has no problem with saying: "I don't know." Yes, knowledge in and of itself is not bound by morality, because morality is just a means for humans to coexist (and a highly subjective one at that), and knowledge is not. It helps us with understanding the world around us and when applied makes our livings easier. In effect it can not be moral. The ones who use the knowledge are the ones that have the responsibility to use it in a moral manner. And even that is not really an easy thing to do since morality changes with time.
@@brkr78 'an intrinsic morality based on pure empathy.' if it's intrinsic, then it's metaphysical, and even if it's not, it's still, as hostilefun says, societal morality, a cultural tradition, and method of life. If your morality is based on a pure ontological truth say, laid down by God or natural laws, that's completely equal in its influence on agency as an empathy or utilitarian form of morality. If you think your understanding of the world is freer because you don't follow religion, youre not really understanding morality.
@@jameslivesey8322 How is the innate ability of empathy god given? It is born out of necessity, because we are social creatures, and without that ability we would not be able to work as such. And humans are far from the only species that has that ability. But that is beside the point of your argument. Morality is a social construct, and it really is nothing else. It is shaped by the society and culture that surrounds you as a way to encourage or, in more extreme cases, enforce certain behavioral patterns. That doesn't mean that you have to accept it without questioning it. As long as it is bound by human definitions, by humanistic ideals, it should, neigh, must be challenged when your own perception and idea of right and wrong does not align with it. Worst case is - nothing changes. Slightly better is - You learn something about yourself. Or, in the best-case scenario, it leads to the betterment of the society. However, once morality is codified into any believe system it tends to be untouchable. Questioning it means questioning god. It is wielded as a shield and a weapon by those who claim they act in the name of their god. It is used as a means to quell any dissent, to keep those at bay that might challenge the ones in charge of “interpreting” the meanings of any scripture, that are adapting “morality” to their own needs. It is a clerical control of the masses, exerted for anything but divine reasons. The beginnings of the old testament, for example, date back to the oral traditions of a bronze age tribe in the middle east. It’s a combination of original stories and adaptations of other stories from the region, compiled into an ever-growing collection. It has been used to justify the place everyone has in the word, including slaves and kings. It has been utilized to make a claim on the throne of a neighboring state and has a lot of provable inaccuracies or straight out lies in it. And yet the clergy can not abandon it as it is the foundation of their canon. I mean, even some of the ten commandments are somewhat questionable nowadays. We break 2,4 and 5 on a regular basis, 5 being seemingly more important that all that come after them, and the whole “neighbor”-deal in 9 and 10 only starts to make sense when you distance yourself from the behemoth that the modern Abrahamic religions have become and you look at is for what it is - a set of rules for a tribe. The rest of the commandments are somewhat self-evident and can be summarized with: “Don’t do what you don’t want to be done to you.” Having it sanctioned by a deity only gives those rules more gravitas. And yet here we are, 3000 or so years later, and people still treat it as if it were the be all end all of morality. You can mock me and my ‘utilitarian’ approach to morality whatever way you want, but I’m not the one running around killing people in the name of some invisible super friend. I’m not the one who rejects his son because he’s gay. I’m not the one who is forcing a woman to carry out the child of her rapist. I’m not the one who, under the false pretense of salvation and eternal damnation, tries to extort money from people. I’m not the one who forces pregnant women, children and the old ones to die of thirst when its 40°C+. So, if you think you can tell me that these things are morally superior to my simple “Don’t do to others what you don’t want to be done to you”-rule (and for that you need empathy), then be my guest, show me how you are able to argue that. The only two “religions”, and I kind of use the term here loosely, that can get a passing grade for their morality in my book are Shintoism (because AFAIK it has no moral code as it is primarily a collection of practices without any real dogma) and Wiccans with their “As long as you harm no one do as you want”. So please, enlighten me, in what way can religion help me being a better person. What part of morality in any religion do I need that I cannot, in some form, derive from my “utilitarian” approach?
@@brkr78 You seem to misunderstand me. I don't disagree here. I only disagree with your idea of empathy based morality granting more freedom than other kinds, say, religion. All religious morality that i've encountered stresses questioning, faith, and personal growth. Religious morality IS often wielded as a weapon as you say, and this I find clearly abhorrent. But if you are to take upon yourself any moral code, this will curtail and enable you regarding certain paths in life, regardless of its origin of value. I do not mock Utilitarianism, I am a Utilitarian through and through, and moreover, I am Atheist. In fact, I thinik that 'do unto others as you would wish for yourself' is kind of limiting and self-centered. This saying, often translated from many religious texts seems to do away with the enormous diversity of humans. I should be sensitive of other's wishes that I do not myself share. It's not about treating others as I want, but how they want. But this is just an example of how religion often misses the mark for me, and as such there are many examples of religious morality ultimately being one and same with my own. principally devoted to human kind through love, sacrifice, empathy etc: this is not monopolised by humanists, nihilists, agnostics etc. I am a strong critique of religion, but all I am saying from the start, is not that morality is God given as you have misquoted me, or a defence of Kantian, Platonic, religious etc etc ethics. Only that agency is curtailed and enabled, shaped if you will, just as much by secular ethics as any other kind. that ethics is at the core of any discussion on liberty and agency, and what applies to some ethics applies equally to others. Where poeple are forced to convert, brainwashed, persecuted, etc for their beliefs or into adopting new ones; yes this is clearly horrendous. But take a religious person and one who is not, and their personal morality as shaped and defined by society, friends, readings and so on; the mechanism by which their morality defines them as a person and influences and drives them throughout life is far more similar than different.
@@jameslivesey8322 First off: “is not that morality is God given as you have misquoted me” “if it's intrinsic, then it's metaphysical” I didn’t misquote you, I inferred the meaning of it through my interpretation of what you had written. Semantics, I know. However, having slept over it I kind of see where you are coming from. Ok, so morality itself is not intrinsic as such, it is derived from our understandings of what is right and wrong, what is just and unjust, what is good and bad. And those things ARE intrinsic to our nature. That even applies to other social species like our closest relatives, the great apes, but also dolphins. “All religious morality that I’ve encountered stresses questioning, faith, and personal growth.” That sentence is contradicting itself. If you have faith you can not question, if you question then you do not believe. That is universal in every religion I encountered. Self-improvement is also only so long a thing as it serves the religion in some form and does not go against the faith. Both Christianity and Islam had a time where there were made great endeavors to answer the big questions of their time. They went out of their way to understand the world that surrounded them, they tried to understand how god did it, and by that tried to prove and increase the greatness of god. Those were the times when great discoveries where made in all kind of sciences. Islam improved “al-jabr”, or algebra as it is called nowadays, they observed the stars and developed optics. Christianity also made great strides in astronomy, physics and various arts. However, once they hit a point where their acquired knowledge was in direct contradiction to their believe then that knowledge was suppressed or considered “faulty” and abandoned. “This saying often translated from many religious texts seems to do away with the enormous diversity of humans. I should be sensitive of other's wishes that I do not myself share.” Here’s the thing: As long as the other person is not able or willing to communicate his or her wishes I might be oblivious to them. This is also very dependent on the person I might deal with. If it is a good friend, a lover, a spouse, one’s child then this point is kind of moot since I’m likely aware of those points. If not, then they will let me know (I hope). You do that because you want to be treated the same way. That is what makes us a social species. If it is someone I do not know, then all I can do is act in a civil manner and expect the same in return. A problem only arises if you are a stickler for semantics and literally expect being treated the way you treat others. “But take a religious person and one who is not, and their personal morality as shaped and defined by society, friends, readings and so on; the mechanism by which their morality defines them as a person and influences and drives them throughout life is far more similar than different.” Here I disagree vehemently. A religious person has the whole framework of morality presented to them and does not have to think about it since it is divine. Their moral code is shaped by whatever cult they are following, and they can call upon this moral code when they do something that is objectively questionable. The whole idea of confession and salvation absolves you from whatever you did in exchange for brownie points in your cult of choosing. The whole community, if they find out what you did, are to forgive you as well, since god forgave you through his priest, so who are they to not forgive you? And deeply religious people follow those moral codes because they fear repercussions in the afterlife in the first place and not necessarily out of their own volition. A non-religious person is forced to evaluate the morality presented to him through his surroundings. He must answer his own consciousness, does not have an easy way out of doing something bad. He only can ask those he aggrieved for forgiveness and depending on what he did that might never happen. But on the other hand, he is also not bound by the same restrictions a religious person has. Thus, you can’t default to something like “What would Jesus do?” and you have to ask yourself what the result of that action might entail, for you and for others. Of course, there are those who fall in the middle of those two extremes, but those are actually agnostics, even though they might not have noticed it themselves. Because religion as a whole conceptionally requires obedience, you are not allowed to question because you have to believe. They have the morality of their cult of choosing as a starting point but can adapt it every which way. However, these people are on the road to becoming atheists, they only keep their god around just to be sure. They need someone to blame, to beg, to have the feeling of not being alone or any other reason. And because they fear death and have a hard time imagining that it means that they just cease to exist. They deceive themselves into believing in an afterlife, because they can’t fathom that the suffering in life does not get rewarded at some point. They need that lest they despair. They can default on their god, their cult in times of need, but when they live a good life they pay them no heed. Their morality is also shaped by that duality - afraid to strive too far from what they have been taught in fear of divine retribution they still are somewhat able to adapt - but only to a certain degree. The farther they stray from their cult, the more they learn about other cults, the more they accept that there is no deeper meaning in live but the one you give it, the more they are able to diverge from those ideas, those ethics and morals implanted onto them. That a lot of what is considered moral aligns is more born out of the mutual understanding of desirable and undesirable behavior. But people, especially westerners, seem to think about morality as an absolute. They apply what is, in their culture, considered moral to other cultures, cultures way older than them. They feel like they have the absolute moral high ground and talk down to everyone that does not adhere to their moral framework. If you are religious, then you are somewhat bound by the morality of the religion and you have a hard time trying to see the other side. So yeah, I stand by my point that I can look at things from different angles when I’m not bound by arbitrary rules placed upon me by through religion.
I enjoy all of your dune videos. No one is as thorough and passionate about the series as you. As someone who has always been fascinated by this story, these videos are awesome. Herbert was dropping jewels in these books.
But in a way sciene can be very subjective and what I mean it that 'science' at one point said that the Earth was the center of the universe. I'm not saying I don't believe in science I choose to study science in college but it is not end-all-be-all that it sometimes presented as. I believe to try and understand science for yourself as much as you can and be rational and be inquisitive. If someone tells you something is true don't let your inquiries stop there continue looking for your own truth. Not your own version of the truth but develop your own life philosophy. Also have you read the Dark Tower series by Stephen King. I would just love to see you create videos about his magnum opus. I think you could really enjoy it. It 8 books long including a novella along with several of King's other works tying into the story.
Christie Brooks geocentrism never was a scientific position. No scientific procedure was used to produce that theory. Kepler and many othet on the other hand used a prototype of the scientific methods to produce the theory of heliocentrism.
Wrong. Science is never subjective, because science properly deals only with objective facts. The meanings (aka "truths") people draw from those facts are what is subjective, but those have nothing to do with science. Science is just a procedure used to validate or disprove claims about facts. Nothing more.
we have free speech so we can have this discourse. however, this freespeech is currently under attack by the radicals on both sides of the political spectrum. antifa and social justice on the left and the alt-right and white identitarians on the right.
Daneelro I'm very much in the center. and I don't see what I am equating wrongly here. They all employ the same tactics to shut down debate, only for diffrent sides of the political spectrum. horse shoe theory. Not that that matters to extremists: if your not with the left, you must be nazi. If your not with the right, you must be a communists.
The left isn't ascending. It's eating itself up and is dragging the western world into the abyss along with it. The left is afraid of the increasing amount of people who are turning against it. They are rightfully afraid.
Having political correctness in society and politics harms the stability of a country as does religion in governance. Is it sane to have people shape reality by their individual desires (gender disorder)? How can gender be fluid? Political correctness is a form of religion that is effecting governance and social sanity.
Daneelro don’t watch any Ben Shapiro. in what way is what I say bullshit? How is it sane to believe that a persons desire can change reality? If it is a faith or make-belief, I am fine with it , but they portray it as a fact. They claim that gender is a social construct yet so are many other words , the word water is a social construct yet it has certain traits. How are they not deluded ? How are they different from those that identify as furniture or gum? There are all kind of wackos out there , yet they want you to believe that they are sane and the worst part is that they convict people such as you to believe their bullshit. They might be highly functional mental disorder persons., yet they remain the definition of bullshit.
agreed. pc culture seems nice on the surface: helping the oppressed. but they quickluy define any group who is doing better in society as oppressors and the less succesful groups the oppressed. On top of that comes the fact that their identity politics and shaming of white males has let to the rise of a right wing extremist ideoligy which seeks to establish a white ethno state.
THANK YOU FOR THIS VIDEO!!! Thank you for emphasizing the points Dune is making about avoiding charismatic leaders, and keeping religion out of politics and government. This is all too relevant to our current situation. Thank you for all you do, I just finished your Ultimate Guide to Dune video series and it was incredible. I also recently finished the Hyperion Cantos books, and if it wasn’t for you I never would have known about that amazing series. Thank you!!!
I’ve said it before but I had Dune sitting on a shelf staring at me. I had tried reading it a couple of times and I couldn’t get a grip of it; I thought the language was too slippery and arcane. After watching a good few of your videos and searching through other resources I had at last a handle on what Dune was trying to achieve. It’s still not a easy read, I don’t believe it’s meant to be; but it is extremely thought provoking. I’ve just finished Children of Dune and I look forward to continuing the saga Thank you for the information and entertainment!
This is an older video, and the first part of this video you explain your journey on the Dune videos. I just want to tell you that your work is top-notch, I love Dune and you do it justice. Well done.
Your analysis is excellent. I read the Dune series a long time ago, but coming back to it now and being older, I am able to appreciate it even more. The videos are well done and the hard work shows. Your ideas help me consider the books, individually and collectively, from different perspectives. Just a quick note to say thanks, I'm going to kick in on Patreon, hope others will do the same.
I know I’m late too the game on this but I love your channel. I watched the 1980’s movie Dune on vhs growing up (along with Star Trek and Star Wars) and it really enraptured me in a way that I can’t explain. It’s an epic universe and you do it justice, if you read this and it’s your first time to the channel you should keep watching. Everything is not just explained, it’s told with eloquence and objective knowledge. The handle he has on this universe is astounding and bears an honest listen. Dune is wonderful and these videos give the universe proper justice. Awesome work!
A song of ice and fire is what brought me to this channel but you're quickly making a Dune fan out of me, thanks to yours and comicbookgirl19's videos on this fictional universe over the past year I have become determined to read the novels.
your videos got me to read Dune for the first time, I've read it three times now ... you already know what a gift that is to a person thanks for taking the time and effort to do this channel greetings from Minnesota
I deeply appreciate your breakdown of the Dune universe. My first exposure to Dune was the 1984 movie. It totally confused me so I ended up reading all 6 books. Your explanation of the series has help to fully understand the depth of Herberts words. Thank you and keep up your videos!
You know, I've always loved the whole Dune series but stumbling upon your videos just added a new level of depth to my desire to re-read them and look into your eloquent detailing and explanations in every one of these series you've made. Thank you for such incredible work and breathed you put into them!
Im so glad I found your channel! The concepts in the Dune series are so invaluable and interesting Ive been hungry for this kind of long form analysis. You have a great approach and im stoked to spend the next few days deep diving back into the lore and interpretations you've shared.
