Hearing these lectures gives me the strength to bring order in my life, without DR. Peterson, I would have completely and utterly destroyed my life with not even a shred of happiness. Thank you DR. peterson. I thank you from the core of my heart.

56:13 56:55 "What's the definition of work? It's the sacrifice of the present for the future."

God bless you, Jordan. Thank you for making and keeping these lectures available.

"I don't think that we should assume that the default position is noise. I think that we should assume that it's signal." /JBP 30:33; 32:52; 33:21/ Brilliant!

I find it very interesting how Jordan said that he never seen anyone get away with anything, ever. People always paid the price for their misdeeds.

"HISTORY STARTS WHEN PEOPLE DESCEND INTO CHAOS "

I've seen almost all your lectures except for the old ones (in which you wear suspenders) and I've got no complaints, all of them are great and I've learned things like mad, so that's good, but the last part of this video about Adam and Eve and the snake... man, that was better than drugs, really. Thank you very much.

Just incredible, thank you for these contributions to youtube. You earned my respect and subscription.

33:20, "I don't think we should assume that the default position is noise. I think we should assume it's Signal." That's gold.

Interestingly, in french we literally use the term "tohu-bohu" as a synonym of chaos, but also racket (noisy chaos to be specific).

Genius. Thank you for giving me the tools to articulate my reality.

36:00 - 38:00 public speaking 56:30 - 47:07 definition of the work

luv 33m20s. that's so damn profound.

I prefer to define Logos as the formulation or transformation of thoughts, ideas, desire, dreams into reality via the structure and medium of words.

Culture changes as the environment in which it exists changes.

Beautiful

Prof. Peterson is there any way I could get a hold of the paper you mentioned at 11:24?

[14:00] The concept of Taom (Undifferentiated chaos) [17:56] Logos

Sir, which is the paper (about which you said nobody read) are you talking about? Anticipating your response. Thank you.

@kebabas222

8 жыл бұрын

+parth dudhiya Or is it article called "Religion, Sovereignty, Natural Rights, and the Constituent Elements of Experience" (2006) which is on scribd?

@rishabhsinha3007

7 жыл бұрын

Sir you use chaos, order,mediator trinity. If my understanding of your lectures is right , when elements of reality are outside your conceptualisation of reality you label it as chaos. But from my subjective viewpoint ,considering im the one with the limited consciousness , its more like anything outside my understanding isnt there. Its not even chaos. Its nothing. And therefore a subjective phenomenological tripartite would be of creator ,preserver, destroyer. You think using this trinity would be of any use.?

@nightbuster1

7 жыл бұрын

@ Rishabh Sinha, I know this question has been subjected to Prof. Jordan Peterson, but I am quite tempted to answer this.. The question becomes what is given in a problem. In this case if you make "anything outside my understanding isnt there" then there can be no question of limited consciousness.. because the answer has been provided in the given.. It is only in the realization of a limited consciousness that one realizes that there is something outside of my own understanding. As an adult if one realizes that the consciousness is limited and at the same time believe that there is no understanding which exists outside of his own, then that is simply ignorance, hawkish or possibly even denial.. For example, a child say of age 4, has no concept of consciousness.. You point can make absolute sense there. Because there is no development of consciousness yet, he may believe there is no understanding exists outside of his own..I may be making a loose point but a closest example I could find right away. On the other hand, conceptually, only god can make the claim of having no understanding beyond his own.. Hence your tripartite of Creator, Preserver, Destroyer.. Having said this, as you, I would too like to hear from Prof. Jordan B Peterson.. We shall wait on that :)

The dogma of the Asumption in Body and Soul of the Most Blessed Virgin Mary was proclaimed (teached as part of the revelation) in 1950, by Pope Pius XII, but the roots of the belief were quite old. "According to St. John of Damascus, at the Council of Chalcedon in 451, Roman Emperor Marcian requested the body of Mary, Mother of God. St. Juvenal, who was Bishop of Jerusalem replied “that Mary died in the presence of all the Apostles, but that her tomb, when opened upon the request of St. Thomas, was found empty; wherefrom the Apostles concluded that the body was taken up to heaven,” It's true that, like many others dogmas about the Virgin, that this belief was very "popular" specially in the countries of South America.

Itsjack Marmastein is the best name I've ever heard

These days, Beri'ah is usually pronounced "Briah". Its more recongnizable.

the third one is VOHU. Rhyming with TOHU. VABOHU means AND VOHU. Very much enjoyed your lecture, as always.

13:33 even if your society intrinsically values men above women like the ancient Jewish society, you would have to claim that equal amount of divinity is in both men and women because the sons of these men would have less and less of "god" within them with each new generation. If both men and women are equal in divinity then the sons of these men would stay pure across all time. I think that's a reasonable explanation.

48:40 I think the term is Assumption of Mary.

"even the flies want to get stoned.."

[50:10] The Garden of Eden

[33:30] Adam and Eve

36:03 - 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

JPII says that it is not men and women as individuals the image god but as couples. This is a huge resolution of the problem of patriarchy, though not a feminist solution.

For insights on why Logos was attributed to Christ you should navigate a bit into the Christian Qabalah. Quite a sophisticated tool.

00;45:00 the catholic church and birth control 00:52:00 snakes in the garden of eden

So humans found truth by two tribes having their own biased founding stories and blending them together trying to minimize the contradictions? So where does anything resembling truth enter? Is the truth in a tribes biased founding theory, or is truth when you corrupt your founding myth?

@claudinasoarestorres2503

11 ай бұрын

There was 12 tribes, just like you have 12 months to a year and 12 hours of a day and even 12 sodiac signs astrologically talking. You can't ignore the overwhelming amount of history to minimise your scepticism about the JudeoChristian contributions of wisdom. Guess what: I offer you the choice of becoming a moslem or even better adhere to ateist beliefs in which case you will worship something... Star Wars.. yo cellphone or if you really strong in your belief you'd worship YOURSELF giving rise to the Antichrist

@claudinasoarestorres2503

11 ай бұрын

Truth begin to surface when you acknowledge that there's good and evil. So 1 tribe summarised it for you, read the 10 commandments. In my town there's no police station... I dare you break any of the 10 commandments and you'd awaken the wrath of your neighbours against you. If it still doesn't make sense feel free to ask someone else cause I won't waste my time with you any longer

we should also consider that other animals have to uncover their genitals to signal sexual availability

The discussion he starts at about 19:52 is a bit of a strawman as to Communist ideas, as Prof. Peterson puts it. It is silly at best to say that the ideas behind Communism exist because "Marx wrote them down". Those ideas have a history at least as long as the ideas which he opposes to Communist ideas. What drives those who profess Communism (not necessarily those who rule Communist societies) is a principle of justice which is as old as Genesis or at least the Tanakh.

@brianbuch1

8 жыл бұрын

Fair enough, Prof. Peterson. That said, you've missed my point, which was not about the people who have the ideas, but about the antiquity of the principles. They don't exist merely because someone, even someone of the stature of Karl Marx, "wrote them down". The hope that human beings can consciously order societies to suit principles of fairness and equity might be not only forlorn but dangerous. So then what hope is there?

@brianbuch1

8 жыл бұрын

+BRIAN BUCHBINDER And I've forgotten my manners. Thank you for these lectures.

@astrixx

8 жыл бұрын

+BRIAN BUCHBINDER I think what Professor Peterson is arguing is that political philosophies like Communism do not hold a realistic view of human beings, or to be more clear, they tragically ignore the human psyche (in fact, Communism has very little to say about it at all). The deep structures that govern human behavior should be the central driver of any sane political or moral discourse.

It is hard to remember that Jesus came to reveal the Father. And the Father and Jesus are not concepts. And some of the Bible is revealed wisdom, not human concepts, or philosophy. Think of the old opaque nature of the super hot, super symetrical plasma that existed shortly after the big bang. No one 5,000 yrs ago could have conceived of these things, but there it is in genesis. Some of the Bible came out of human mind. But a lot was divinely revealed wisdom. And God said "I am the lord God, I change not. Now our concepts of God change.As we get more intelligent, and or sophisticated, we have a better understanding of Gods nature. That is why the old testament describes a powerful and judgemental God. Because that is the only way humans could conceive of God. But after Jesus revealed a loving father, there are still plenty of so called christians who are self righteous and extremely judgemental. Calvinist Catholic, Baptist used to talk about nothing but hell fire and damnation. They were even manipulated into persecuting the Jews, something a modern right thinking christian of today would never do, because we have now read the Bible for ourselves. So God does not change but or concepts about God change.

Jordan you are brilliant but please STOP talking about Catholicism unless you plan to get the facts correct. the church DID NOT just decide to proclaim Mary's assumption in the 1950s. The idea and belief was already there from the beginning of the faith. Also, Mary IS NOT worshiped. Only God is. She is beloved and venerated because God tells us to. She does not have a competing throne with Christ. Heretics..I mean Protestants..think we worship her. The issue is not that we love Mary, the issue is that Protestants DO NOT.

@claudinasoarestorres2503

11 ай бұрын

Hi can you please quote the book of the bible in which God says for Mary to be loved and venerated? My scepticism arises when in the council of Miacea the bible was summarised or put together or whatever... in which many pagan beliefs were amalgamated together to please the masses and come up with a cult such as Catholicism. Example is the Asheras Pole , basically a statue of a woman really OPENING herself up next to the altar. See any catholic church and there it is: an asheras pole next to the altar so this act of positioning statues around churches so people can bend their knees to them is anti- biblical. I think if you think and read what the bible really says you'd reach the conclusion that you might be worshipping a satanic cult. Example 2 during mass the other Sunday the song included the morning star. Fuk that yo. Singing is POWERFUL but to Lucifer? Not Mee!!!. Last Example of amalgamation in Egypt they had the god sun... okay in Sunday is the day of church for Catholics so... The Sabbath is the Holy day when God rested and its Saturday. Today I'm not in the mood to trash your entire belief system all you have to do is read your bible where it says thou shall not call any man "father" now can you please remind us all how you address your local priest? What what? It it FATHER???? OHH you are committing a terrible mistake!!!