https://youtubetranscript.com/?v=upigFLpzARI
So Nomad in Socks says, it was very helpful to me when you used the word decompress when referring to what you are doing when you pull out the concepts of a symbol and then put them into a specific, relatable perspective for us. My question is, you have any insight into the reverse of that process? What process is compressing these symbols in the first place? Did I even use that word? I don’t remember using that word. I know I use the word compress a lot in the sense that the notion of compress, or at least the way that I understand when I talk about a compression, it means that imagine there are, all right, imagine your day. So you have a bunch of things that happened to you during the day. And actually there’s an indefinite amount of things that happened to you during the day. But let’s say there’s a more definite amount of things that happened to you that you can actually pay attention to, all right? So out of that amount of things you can pay attention to, there’s a number of things that you’ll remember, right? And then out of those things that you remember, there are a number of things that you’re going to use to put together into a narrative to tell the story of your day to your spouse. So that’s how symbolism works. There’s a compression of factuality into a symbolic structure. And so once you get to the story part, once you get to the part where you’re actually telling the story of your day to your spouse, that has to be organized in a certain way for it to be interesting to that person. And so in that desire to organize the facts in an interesting manner, you’ll end up with something which will have a universal symbolic structure. And the closer it is to the universal symbolic structure, the more your spouse is going to remember what you said. And the less it has, like let’s say the least participation in that pattern means that your story will kind of just float by or the person will find it boring, will find it uninteresting, or we’ll just forget it right away. And so that’s what I mean when I talk about compression is that’s how symbolism works. And so my contention is that that can happen at different levels and not just at individual levels, but it can happen at let’s say national levels, at tribal levels, at different levels that this type of compression can have. And then they can also happen at a cosmic level. And that’s what you find, let’s say, in the early stories in scripture, is like a cosmic compression of facts that have taken huge, huge, huge amounts of information or rather extremely important information and has compressed it in a way so that we, even thousands of years later, can still attend to it and can still remember it. And so that has a certain effect on the way that you organize things. And even the slant of the words or the concepts that end up shifting and moving in order to actually communicate the thing you’re trying to communicate. And then sometimes being, let’s say being exact is not the best way to do it. That there are actually other types of storytelling that are not exact in the way that we think of kind of scientific exactness, which will be better to tell that story. And so that’s what that’s my contention about. And so my contention is that the story in scripture are all talking about events. None of them are just someone who sat there and made it up. They’re actually talking about events, but they’re doing it more and more, especially as you move towards Genesis, more and more in a compressed fashion so that once you get to the creation narrative, you’ve got the entire cosmos compressed into this one narrative, which is so full that it’s mind-blowing when you start to unpack it. And so, yeah. So maybe I use the word decompress when I explain it, and so when I’m explaining it, I am definitely doing a form of decompression in the sense that I’m picking apart this structure and I’m showing you aspects of it so that you can be able to see it, let’s say, happen.