Joe Rogan goes, "Hello, freak bitches!" followed by Jordan Peterson saying "Who the hell doesn't wanna hear that?" LMAO

@bengarbutt4700

3 жыл бұрын

Brilliant 😂😂😂

@absolutebedlam

2 жыл бұрын

So good

@japjotsingh3266

Жыл бұрын

hahaa

@nareshdewasi4098

7 ай бұрын

😂😂

These are the conversations I've always wanted to have with my friends if we were smarter.

@ssn22

4 жыл бұрын

well we all wanted but try to have same conv. with a leftist !!

@J0MBi

4 жыл бұрын

It's the conversation you think you have when you smoked a lot of weed but really it was just "....like there's there's like metaphorical truth and it's genetically passed on and uh... what was I saying?"

@rpgober3048

4 жыл бұрын

Have you tried talking to them on DMT?

@eliramirez3798

3 жыл бұрын

Go get some new friends

@megja1812

3 жыл бұрын

Lol Yup 👍 I find majority of people don’t like having these convos. Boring ass folk.

This is how conversations should happen. People may disagree on things, but respect and civil discussion leads to a better understanding of differing points of view.

@LH-nd9qg

6 жыл бұрын

Joseph Massaro ((applause)) my thought exactly.

@SlugDropsonheads

6 жыл бұрын

Joseph Massaro Well that depends on the 'arena'; it is easy to remain calm during a debate that is this ambiguous and meta... The issues that plague our nation, and the discussions that are needed aren't as easily detached from one's own image/ place in society. The only one (emotionally) invested in this conversation is Mr. Peterson, but he thinks society is at the brink of collapse...

@SlugDropsonheads

6 жыл бұрын

In other words, no one's character is being called into question.

@josephmassaro

6 жыл бұрын

SlugDropsonheads+ Emotion is a good motivator, but a poor way to debate. It's what devolves disagreements into vitriolic mudslinging and ideological chasms. Also, does one's character need to be called into question? The argument is the thing, not the one making it.

@missionpupa

6 жыл бұрын

Emotionally invested? whats wrong with being invested? That makes us human, would you prefer someone who made claims but dont really care about what theyre saying? If you are wondering his disposition, he developed that tone from dealing with ignorant SJW's. If you can get past that and actually listen to what hes saying, then you will easily realize he is speaking for sincere concern using sound reasoning.

I love hearing JP say his intellect is at a limit in these issues, when I struggle to understand even 10%. And I'm a highly educated man myself. Just the scale and perspective of things. When people with an iq of 160+ and a life time devoted to thinking, reach a limit to solve the more complex issues in society.... It's somewhat humbling.

@streameant

4 жыл бұрын

Jordan has a 160+ iq? Wtf

@Dman9fp

4 жыл бұрын

Everybody has a limit, especially around dangerous topics where a decieving headline about him saying something could easily come out. But he recognizes there has to be helpful lessons in mythology if it has persisted for so long, helped and shaped a very successful modern society and many even in the modern age of science and tech still believe in it. Of course America as a nation has Protestant Puritan roots so maybe it shouldn't be surprising it's still around, but Peterson realizes it still may have some use and lessons for society, even if it isn't a scientific peer reviewed work by any means

@tjdugan5077

3 жыл бұрын

level 3 neural network I looked it up once and saw a video where he said 150s

@MrYutbe57

3 жыл бұрын

160 is radically high but not so unbelievably uncommon as people probably think. Mine is 140's typically but IQ doesn't scale linearly. It functions more like the decibels scale. That podcast was intellectual Shakespearean poetry to someone who can (relative to Jordan and Bret) can barely form a proper couplet.

@shanks6190

3 жыл бұрын

@@MrYutbe57 where can you even find out your IQ, people tell me to avoid those 10 minute online quizzes so is the only option to pay for a test at a proper facility?

Please please please have more Dr. Peterson in the future

4 жыл бұрын

@Pepe The Cat Silence vermin, your kind isn't fit to address me.

@AXharoth

4 жыл бұрын

oh look 2 years and hes still here xD

@skimask5933

4 жыл бұрын

@ Holy fuck you got rolled lol

4 жыл бұрын

@@skimask5933 I don't care about your delusions sleepy. You don't matter.

I love how grounded Joe Rogans oppinions are, he really adds a tether for us of a simpler mind to hold on to next to the likes of Peterson and Weinstein

My favourite thing about Joe Rogan is that he knows enough to keep his mouth shut and let his guests do the talking.

I would Think "Thou Shall Not Murder" covers the enriching uranium thingy.

This is when you believe, pursue, and execute a passion. College and higher education is just a index or guide to that information, but you must receive, parse, interpret and transmit. A million more psychology grads that achieve a professorship over the next 100 years won't reach Peterson level. Be happy to live during his time, I am.

I'm learning English, and i understood 90% of what i heard, i'm super happy :)

@guttachetter1087

Жыл бұрын

good job

@dlentz989

Жыл бұрын

I am fluent in English and I understood about 50%. Go you!!

“The idea of truth is much older than the idea of objective truth. And the original notion of truth wasn’t objective truth. It was like, “The arrow flies straight and true” and it meant something like, “Reliably on it’s way to the appropriate destination”- something like that. And when Christ said, “I am the way, the truth and the light” the truth that he was talking about wasn’t an objective truth.”- Genius

@alotan2acs

5 жыл бұрын

Better now the muddy the waters with “truth” then. Say “this is the morally right destination” or something like that. Much clearer.

@IvanGonzalez-kf4lp

10 ай бұрын

That begs the question. How do you know it’s reliably on its way to the proper destination. Well, it would have to be true first in order for that to be the case but the very definition you’ve presented pre supposes that truth instead of constituting it.

@miiscrayolacat2

4 ай бұрын

Not new though. The concept of the truth as being transcendental predate jordan peterson. St Augustine wrote about it.

I'm a nerd, I've been listening to this guy non-stop.

@streameant

4 жыл бұрын

I'll like to see your social skills and bank account

LOVE that you had JP on the pod. He's awesome. Thanks Joe!

There was nowhere to go.... There was nothing to do! So together we descended to make our dreams come true!

Awesome. We need a revisit on this conversation now please. (2021)

Joe was so on point at 14 minutes in! Said just what I wanted to.

@andraw47

4 жыл бұрын

Joe proper glitched out

@idoanmarciano301

2 жыл бұрын

What do you mean so on point? He doesn't get it

@Infamous41

2 жыл бұрын

@@idoanmarciano301 he kept quiet

This is the most mind blowing discussion!! These guys are putting words, names and ideas of dozens of things that have bothered me throughout my 47yrs. I was fuzzy and not understanding the consequences of my decisions. My decisions were based on my confused and underdeveloped ideas I held to be true.

Love a channel (show) that allows this argument to go on like this !!

Imaging if Joe had invited Eddie bravo, what he could add to the conversation

@missionpupa

6 жыл бұрын

Pizza Gate and Moon Landings!

@jasonmpd2946

6 жыл бұрын

Flat earth and fake moon landing bullshit.

@micksmith5123

4 жыл бұрын

I would add a like but want to keep it at 69

@trollwayy5981

4 жыл бұрын

Mick Smith... i just don’t give a fuck

@Ale-do3rn

4 жыл бұрын

Imagine if he invited Johnny Bravo... that would be pretty interesting...

Seeing JBP riled up is more action packed than most big budget hollywood action movies.

21:20 - Joe Rogan proving he's actually pretty smart, with an interjection about ethics. The dude is actually super sharp.

Totally enjoyable , Thank You Joe .

If I were to hang out with Jordan and Bret socially, after 5 minutes I would be drooling on the table.

Truth is a being. His path narrow. Ones head is lies. The heart just right. A dead heart far too wide.

False information may be “useful”, but you don’t get to say it’s true, you get to say it’s useful.

@Archangel76

2 жыл бұрын

Underrated comment.

Imagine being Joe Rogan and just watching this conversation happen in front of you. 🤯 Thats the longest time ive ever known him not to speak.

'Human beings needed to figure out how to act without dying before they could understand the nature of the world well enough to justify that' insane

@danasansone9152

4 жыл бұрын

whoa

@streameant

4 жыл бұрын

Lying makes you survive and have a better life but is not true nor moral.

@johnnyb7271

4 жыл бұрын

networks how does it make you have a better life? It makes your life infinitely more complex because you have to maintain the lies and remember everything that you have said and lied about.. The truth buttresses that and makes reality simpler (most of the time) and thus better..

@streameant

4 жыл бұрын

@@johnnyb7271 yes, you have to remember what you said, but you'd rather remember than facing bad consequences

@johnnyb7271

4 жыл бұрын

@@streameant?? if you continuously lie you wont be able to remember.. not everyone is a james Moriarty type genius. Then your just delaying those bad consequences for a later date and probably with dire consequences.. stupidity still

the language spoken is godly

Jordan Peterson is a perfect example of religious truth or metaphorical truth. He may not present the "scientific truth" that Sam Harris does but he's helped way many more people that Sam has. So what's more "true'"? I'll go with Jordan Peterson because his advice is practical and can improve your life so much more effectively and efficiently. Sam Harris can definitely state facts but are they helpful? Not to me so much anyways.

beautifully had conversation.

This is an incredibly beautiful explanation of why religion is so important, and why society & individuals are so massively blessed by it!! People get far too caught up on the capital “T” Truth instead of understanding the depth of wisdom contained within scripture and prophetic wisdom, that Jordan P breaks down with an unbiased depth that is unrivaled!!

@willspeed6804

Жыл бұрын

The problem with religion is that people hide behind it instead of actually taking personal responsibility of trying to be a better person everyday and consider their actions in a way that helps/benefits others.

“The arrow is reliably on its way to the target” is a way of referring to the correspondence of a statement to its intended referents.

the truth is so extremely frightening that no-one would sleep again. you hit the enrichment button God help us to be brave and tidy up as a group

Peterson, a living a legend.

People assume because Peterson is defending religion he should automatically be discredited. Realize that these traditions have resurrected an entire civilization to literal global dominance. I would slow down and listen to his ideas critically before passing judgement.

Air guitar. Love this.

11:04 "You shall love God more than anything," includes the implication of "Don't enrich uranium because that is a dangerous act of loving 'power' more than God." come on, guys, flex that grey matter. disclaimer: i don't know what "God" means.

This was SO.... Fcking.... Deep. Im pretty sure my IQ raised slightly just from listening.

what a high quality talk jeez

Joe needs some 4k cameras

@Ck-jy8bw

4 жыл бұрын

No need to see his forehead in that much detail probably blind us all from the reflection of it

This might be one of the greatest conversation of truth and religious truth

Mind Blown!!

This is the best one yet.

@getchasome6230

4 жыл бұрын

Still is a year later too

The truth is the same as objective truth, it leads you to having a better life

The title should also include Bret's name. His input was profound

I'm writing an essay about truth, I don't know if this was more helpful or more confusing!

@anneroos9463

3 ай бұрын

Hahah same!

and for that field path point, well thank god instinct takes the reigns!

What Peterson is saying is the same thing as the difference between The Old Testament and The New Testament ... The Old Testament is Truth, the New Testament is also Truth - they are the same Truth. Truth actually fits into all time period and all circumstance .. this is why a book containing Truth, even thought the world is foreign can be transferred into a current world. Truth is an absolute.

The nice thing about our emotions is that they don't evolve with time. Jealousy was the same in a person 2000 years ago as it is in us today. Same with joy, anger etc. So to say that ancient wisdom becomes irrelevant over time isn't taking this into account.

@connorstefanski9088

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah I sort of think Bret missed the point (I said this in another comment). The archetypes shown by Jung are general enough that they can be applied across time even as circumstances change. The archetype or the christ like figure that Jordan mentions that stands up to the tyranny of the state is general enough that it can be applied across time even as the nature of the states tyranny changes over time. Because it is so general it can apply to standing up to a state that allows the enriching of uranium in the present just as easily as it applies to standing up to the Roman persecution of Christians 2000 years ago. I think that’s the main point, the fact that the archetypes in ancient religion are so general is exactly why they stay relevant. Their application may be updated, but values they present need not be. There’s no reason to codify enriching uranium in the Ten Commandments, application of the main point will cause the problem to take care of itself

Sometimes I wish Jordon Peterson would chill with the metaphors and up the concision

@Magepure6749

4 жыл бұрын

Man, I'd say as far as the whole point of this talk was - metaphors are indispensable. Their simplest forms are euphemisms and exaggerations, the most complex the archetypal stories. Some people foolishly split reality into truth and falsehood - like those idiots who fact-check jokes XD - this is a very arrogant approach, because it assumes that we have the capability to know everything about everything around us with 100% certainty, which is simply not true due to a number of factors, sensory limitations of our mortal bodies being just one of many. We benefit greatly from having the mental skill of approximation, and it is where metaphors come to action - they are the working-tool-truths. They allow us to talk about things we'd otherwise not discuss just because we don't know everything about them or because of a taboo. The ability to understand and talk in metaphors is crucial for advancement of human knowledge, and so is the ability to approximate - both of these skills the fanatical post-modernist anti-theists want to throw away, just because of the fact that it's mostly religious packages that those abilities came it.

Just 3 men trying g to understand themselves and the world better. Its honestly beautiful

Bret's porcupine example have an pre-assumed utility/goal function, which is "to survive, to be safe". but not everyone share the same goal/value/utility. it is always better for people to know "the truth that porcupine cannot throw quills", based on this truth, people can make decisions for themselves. for those who share the same utility that "to survive, to be safe", they will probably stay far away anyway. for those who want to take some risk or want some excitement, they will move closer. anyway, to know the truth is always better for decision making.

"Interpretating" 27:40 and then a good interjectation

Good ol' JRE.

The hazard of enriching it was obvious. Its covered with though shall not kill....

Didn't anyone else notice how Peterson just broke down the formalization of Ethics impromptu? Brilliant.

It's not only about something being true, it's also about the propagation of truth in human context. A metaphorical truth is necessarily memeable, as such it is more effective and more widespread than just telling straight facts

@IvanGonzalez-kf4lp

10 ай бұрын

But doesn’t actually tell you anything about it’s underlying validity of being trueb

One of the best shows. Joe needs to have Kent Hovind on the podcast

5:55 Joe is like yup lol

He says that things do not happen for a reason but his own explanation proves everything happens for a reason

Jordan Peterson is so convincing.

two brilliant minds

This feels like Truth vs. fact

What an interesting conversation.

Beneath all the shade of questions and interviews, behind all the good intentions and motivations posed by these questions... these ppl constantly put peterson to the test, watching, looking, poking, waiting for him to slide. Setting traps left right and centre and swinging at him tacitly with mighty blows of opposition and sometimes contrariety. Like Samson against a 1000 soldiers he remains. It is beyond me the depth of wisdom this man has by quite frankly speaking what is truth. Clear, concise... unwavering and founded. Anchored upon every piece of detail you can gander across human knowledge. "for I will provide you eloquence and wisdom which none of your adversaries will be able to oppose or refute."

Now this Mister has thaught me that the abstraction of the Scripture isn't just foolish mistake but a way of making those stories applicable to the future. And that's absolutely genius.

@kirathekillernote2173

2 жыл бұрын

Retroactive justification of poorly written books I call it

@Unseen.Warfare

2 жыл бұрын

@@kirathekillernote2173 Every book after The Bible has been influenced by the Bible. The Bible is the origin of the language you are using and the roots of all western books and language.

11:09 1. Though Shalt Not Kill 14:41

Joe lets go man! Interview me!

I have always liked Joe's openness of mind. But today, I loved his Joe's summary at 13.05, it was was good defeat of Jordan's and other guy's 'truth' ideas.

@Oners82

6 жыл бұрын

Noopy "at 13.05, it was was good defeat of Jordan's and other guy's 'truth' ideas." No, it really wasn't. He completely missed the point as Bret explains just afterwards, and so did you apparently. Bret was not saying that it was true that porcupines throw quills, he was saying that there is an evolutionary advantage to telling *untruths* such as "porcupines throw quills", which is why we as a species have a tendency to believe things that aren't true. He explicitly said that the problem with this is that people end up believing things that are *wrong* ! As for Peterson, try looking up the correspondence theory of truth that you seem to adhere to and jump to the criticism section. It's not as simple as it seems.

@_Noopy_

6 жыл бұрын

The main point from Joe was that facts and wisdom are different things. And Jordan and other guy love to conflate them together into their weird definition of "truth". This whole debate is just semantic. These days when we use the word truth for an idea, we mean the factual/ empirical value of the contents of that idea. Not the utilitarian value or the wisdom of the idea. Maybe in older days it was different. But now the connotation of truth = factual. Joe says: Truth is the factual content of an idea. Utilitarian value of the idea is wisdom, not truth. "Porcupines do not throw quills" is a fact and hence truth. And if someone is told that "Porcupines throw quills", it is wrong and untrue, even though there is usefulness and wisdom in that non-factual idea. Peterson says: "Porcupines do NOT throw quills" is truth. And "Porcupines throw quills" is also a type of truth, because it has value to it and it has usefulness to it just like the former statement. Other guy says: The same thing as peterson, he just differentiate the two statements as 'factual truth' (former) vs, 'metaphorical truth' (latter). I am with Joe, i.e. just let the truth be truth guys. The factual truth. Give other words to other things you want to imply. Ultimately Peterson wants to say that bibilical myths have "truth" to them, that is a dangerous and liberal use of the word truth in its modern connotation and context. He can just say, bibilical myths have ideas which tell very interesting insights about how humans think..etc etc. But Dont hijack the word 'truth'.

@_Noopy_

6 жыл бұрын

continuing on the older thread...

@tsaoh5572

6 жыл бұрын

This is not about facts and wisdom. This is not about semantics. I understand the confusion though, as they do not explain themselves very well. This is a discussion about what we are allowed to call 'true', and not on a semantic level. The issue is that even the things we held to be very very simple 'just let the truth be the truth' things have now been rebutted; quantum physics completely threw 'objective truths' in physics upside down. We have to understand that, in the time that we are in now, we hold some things to be 'true' when this will likely be altered or completely changed as our technological capabilities to investigate improve. There is an objective truth out there, but we are just human beings, all we can do is approach this truth. These approximations are the metaphorical truth; they are 'true' for now because this works the best for us now to understand, explain, and interact with our environment. These pre-quantum physics physical laws were regarded 50 years ago as 'true' as people regarded the bible 400 years ago. This is the thing about metaphorical truths. This is why we have to study them and allow space for them in our universities, why religion is so important. These are our 'old' truths that now do not work anymore, that are debunked. We should study them because it teaches us how to move forward, what not to do, and also why in certain truths are more important than others since they seem to survive more in history. We should also be careful about completely disregarding them, since they were indeed the best approximate of an objective truth we had at a a set time. However, as Peterson explains, even though in the past this multi-dimensional (or multi-layered, whatever you prefer) definition of the word truth was understood, we now only adhere to the idea that 'truth is truth', it is an objective thing. This is simply not the case, logically speaking. Also historically speaking even. This is the point they are debating. I am personally not sure whether I agree with this, but yeah this is what I got out of it. Quite brain-cracking.

@Danskadreng

6 жыл бұрын

TSAOH!: Hey, so to break this down VERY simple, would be to say that back in the days where Jesus was around preaching, the "truth" was considered to be that he was the son of God, the earth was flat, and so on. As time went by, we got to debunk those "truths", while some would probably call it theories since no evidence was actually made/shown back then, but generally, they were believed to be the truth. ??? -Thank you in advance.

Why isnt the comment section available on JRE anymore??

@getchasome6230

4 жыл бұрын

Indubitably

Lets get some subtitles for Joe so he can join in the conversation.

Truth is concrete and works on various levels. It is also seems plural. Many of these examples are examples of people compensating with limited truth. Everyone operates in these fallible ways because our brains are limited processors. Obviously a person who possesses more truth is better off, but sometimes we have to operate short of that because we have to deal with a complex life with limited biological resources. The porcupine and malaria examples are great for showing how a brain can compensate by using simplified thought patterns.

@law-two7327

3 жыл бұрын

But the controversial distinction that they make is between "fact" (which seems to be the truth you speak of) and "wisdom" (which may not be "true" in the sense that you're using it). In those two examples, someone without more truth (but more "wisdom"). May in fact be better off...

The most mind blowing podcast I’ve ever heard.

If you prepare for the porcupine with the throwing quills, you are prepared for the porcupine without them too. If you prepare for the snake as if it is a dragon you can handle both, but the inverse fails, assuming that the dragon has all the abilities of a snake, including its speed, and a great, fiery breath and tail and all.

at 26:20 its like jordan just played the most intricate piano composition , hands the spotlight over to Bret who then fumbles out chopsticks.

Truth can simply be defined as love. This can help understanding all living things. The animal kingdom follows their truth, human beings follow their truth often by using the tool of language. Language as a tool is a double edged sword, therefore human truth can be divorced of our instincts to seek love in a healthy minded way. This explains the mental health crisis. Just my opinion.

this is like watching two great stags fighting

What Joe Rogan isn't getting about the Porcupine Metaphor is that all scientific knowledge was at one point, unknown, then known, and will probably be then dismissed by new information. So knowing false or incomplete information that is modifies our behaviour in a way that helps us survive is still useful and also not "wrong" or "lied to" at the time.

He said Pinnochio was a liar. He wasn't a liar. He was a child who lied, being taught not to lie. That's not the same as being a liar. Everyone has lied, especially when they're young.

Peak JRE

My god I wish we forced people to watch debates like this in highschool

sad only 70k ppl have seen this. All that information out there that seems fundamentally important. Can't know/hear them all.

@Ck-jy8bw

4 жыл бұрын

Still only 93k if more people listened to this stuff the world might go places

I dont understand Weinstein's comment about "thou shall not enrich Uranium" when the Bible already says "thou shall not kill", which already covers creating weapons, and enriched Uranium is the cheapest and cleanest method of power generation we have.

I wish Dan Carlin's was in the forth seat or maybe Duncan Trussell.

Joe is just coherent enough to banter his confusion.

very nice debate. Weinstein though is illustrating folk wisdom, which is different from knowledge. Wisdom and knowledge should work for and with one another in my view.

captain marvel post credit scene

Joe rogan being a likeminded intellectual 😉

I don't know what you just said, but you special.

هداكم الله جميعاً إلى الحق المبين، حتى لايكثر تلعثمكم🌹

did youtube really disable comments on the full podcast? or perhaps it was jre in which case it probably wasn't too bad of an idea actually lol

Jesus, Peterson is on another level

mind blown

its called the “gettier problem” from a 1963 paper by edmund gettier

Jre was smarter than us before we even knew it

i like Peterson's use of the word iterative. i often think of the human mind as a compiler of software.

Highly Disagree. Just because Filth ment shit, and people had a reason to not shit in camps because of Gods will. It does not mean that the underlying cause wasn't there. This is exactly what Sam was explaining about pragmatism. A truth exists whether or not you know it yet. Labeling it as something different does not make it "true" whether or not the consequences are good or bad.

What it comes down to is that truth is subjective while fact is objective.

@missionpupa

6 жыл бұрын

You say that like, you solved the problem by simply aligning ourselves to fact than truth. When the real question is distinguishing the two, if there is in fact 2 of them to distinguish each other from.

@thegreenwave6741

6 жыл бұрын

reiwell del going by what peterson and weinstein are saying, truth is subjective to metaphor and perception, while fact is objectively observed and scientifically tested with the same results no matter how many times it's tested. An example would be if someone said a man murdered someone to protect his family. Maybe the murderer was insane and thought the victim was trying to hurt his family, so he murdered the man. To the insane man it was a "truth" that his victim was trying to hurt his family, but it is a fact that the insane man murdered his victim, regardless of whether he thinks it's a fact, the truth or not.

@thegreenwave6741

6 жыл бұрын

reiwell del and there is no alignment to one or the other. I'm discerning one from the other.

@I_Ace

Жыл бұрын

Yeah truth seems to be subjective in some sense. So it seems from this interview is to live out your truth fully

@tombadil64

2 ай бұрын

Wrong, that's what they were discussing the entire time. Did you even listen?

I think what's actually being talked about here is not the difference between fact and truth, but truth and faith.

Keep this in mind when listening to Weinstein: Luke 5:33-39 33 And they said unto him, `Wherefore do the disciples of John fast often, and make supplications -- in like manner also those of the Pharisees -- but thine do eat and drink?' 34 And he said unto them, `Are ye able to make the sons of the bride-chamber -- in the bridegroom being with them -- to fast? 35 but days will come, and, when the bridegroom may be taken away from them, then they shall fast in those days.' 36 And he spake also a simile unto them -- `No one a patch of new clothing doth put on old clothing, and if otherwise, the new also doth make a rent, and with the old the patch doth not agree, that [is] from the new. 37 `And no one doth put new wine into old skins, and if otherwise, the new wine will burst the skins, and itself will be poured out, and the skins will be destroyed; 38 but new wine into new skins is to be put, and both are preserved together; 39 and no one having drunk old [wine], doth immediately wish new, for he saith, The old is better.'