I like Pigliucci; I‘ve read two of his books. Seems like an interesting guy. But I find he‘s really shooting from the hip in talking about Peterson, especially when he makes the classic error at the end of inferring Peterson‘s views from the views of his most extreme fans. I think that some of Peterson‘s stuff is interesting and useful, some seems a little bit like bullshit. But I appreciate his intellectual boldness, which can be expected to lead to a bit of bullshit now and then. Would suggest that Bob invite Peterson to a BH diavlog.

Loved this one. Thank you

Thanks Massimo and Robert for this interesting discussion. If we identify the logos with a non-teleological and non-theistic ordering of the Universe, why use the word. It seems to me not much different than referring to Spinoza's or Einstein's "God". That word has too many contradicting associations from long usages, to be useful. It seems almost a way of mollifying those attached to theistic or teleological concerns, while eliminating such concerns in practice.

Really good discussion. I'd re-direct Pigliucci on his misunderstanding of Peterson and Jung who don't identify 'men' or 'women' with rationality, order v eros and chaos but the 'masculine' and 'feminine' which are both found in men and women---they seem unaware of Jung's contra-sexual aspects 'animus' and 'anima' found in each sex repectively. This isn't to affirm its truth but merely to get the history of ideas correct.

Great topic for discussion. The analysis of Peterson however is way too simplistic. A more thorough understanding of Peterson would help this conversation go along way

Nice talk altogether, with a harsh generalization of Peterson's work at the end of the video. It would be nice if both gentleman have chance to talk to Peterson. I think that would be great conversations. For deeper understanding of Peterson's views i recommend these 3 videos: -Dr Jordan B Peterson | *full-length* 2015 interview -Jordan Peterson & John Vervaeke discuss the Meaning of Life - Master Minds I -The Master and His Emissary: Conversation with Dr. Iain McGilchrist

It would be interesting to hear what Massimo thinks about what Jordan Peterson is going through now (as of Aug 2023) with the 'authorities' insisting that he undergo 're-education' for political thought crimes....?

Merci beaucoup!

I'm still not sure what the logos is since it has so many different definitions. Can I make up my own?

Wasn't Thales of Miletus the first to be known to use the word 'logos'? As it refers to the 'reason and cause' of creation; this is the heart of all philosophy of existence and later it was simply defined as 'reason'.

I don't know if Greek contains these resonances, but once you speak of "counting" you implicate "story" Think of "giving an account of" or "raconteur" or "tale" (cognate with "tally") No way to tell, but did the author of John perhaps mean something like "In the beginning was the story"? That is to say that it asserts that a thought or plan preceded matter (flesh).

Have you worked out how the Logos makes it that the people who do things correctly(good) are rewarded and the ones that don't understand(bad) suffer yet? Feedback is an important factor(clue). I think of the ream of forms as the subconscious now. and have a subconscious link with the Logos.

An incisive take on the Jordan Peterson phenomenon. Glad I listened to it. The connection of this ideology to Jung and to neo-Platonism reminded me of Leo Strauss.

55:00 We should take Burke very seriously. Also, JBP says women weren't the only one oppressed. Men and women were oppresed. By how tough life was. And "women aren't so easy to oppress. You'll notice that if you've ever had a relationship with one." Also JBP men AND women should embrace some of their masculinity"

This was an extremely interesting discussion, especially when it comes to the issue of the Logos. Is the Logos limited to an idea, a pillar of truth, a generic rationally evaluated flow of virtue? (This is what Voltaire, Robispierre, and the Freemason secularists of the French Revolution believed). Or is the Logos a Person, that is the spiritual flow of truth and information in God coming to us from the unseen world in the next dimension beyond our 5 senses? And here is where this discussion of the Logos then leads. Can the Logos be ramped up as a living vital real-time personal guiding Truth in concert with the Spirit of the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Joseph to become Rhema? The Biblical promise is given that at the end of the saga there wil be those who give worth-ship to God in Spirit as well as in Truth. One is left brain (Truth), and the other right brain, (Spirit). Perhaps even male and female, both complementing each other and in harmony. In the Biblical sense Rhema is the spiritually energized and personally delivered real-time guiding information of the Logos. Rhema is the spiritually energized personally delivered Logos that an unseen God personally makes available to certain people. Those people need not be brilliant. And often they are not. Nevertheless humbly submitted people do not walk just by sight but by faith. The testimony of Western Christendom that has blessed the West is that they enjoy this living personally delivered directive accessing truths and pointers to truth they have in their memory banks. Whether they acknowledge it or not people apprehended by God get a download of personally relevant and timely information. They receive this as a continuous stream from the God who is there, the God with whom they have entered into blood covenant.

Darwinian universe theory shades of liebniz/pangloss "best of all possible worlds". Pangloss is of course a character from Voltaire's Candide which was at least in part a satirical rendering of Liebniz. Pangloss is also the character who says "we must tend our garden".

Whitehead's philosophy of organism most definitely is a process metaphysics. In fact, it is the most sophisticated process metaphysics ever crafted.

"GLI" in Italian is somewhat like a consonant "Y" in English. And "CC" in Italian is like "CH" in English. So, it's "pee-yoochi."

Speculation on ones motives from a superficially detached perspective is a slippery slope, especially when that speculation is primarily founded on one's own virtues as prima facie. The point of dialogue is to come to a mutual understanding of the interlocutor's position as well as your own. We don't just know this stuff off the bat. I wish Pigliucci would take a page from Peterson vis-a-vis Jung, and be a bit more charitable. Sounds to me like he's punching down and not realizing his opponent might just be taller than him.

I just really wish that Prof. Wright didn't so frequently interrupt Dr. Pigliucci and talk over him! It's not only rude, but it makes understanding the more soft-spoken Pigliucci difficult.

All I have to say is Yes and?

It's funny that almost every negative critique of JBP in regards to gender differences leave out the Pereto distribution with which he ALWAYS prefaces such descriptions. Too bad even really smart people like Massimo can fall prey to political talking points.

You should read more Jordan Peterson before you comment on him & his work.

Truth, Beauty and Goodness are innate in the universe. Why wouldn't we anthropomorphize that and worship it? Doubt that beauty is objective? See David Deutsch's arguments "Flowers communicate complex vast information across a vast species gap."

Who is Jordan Peterson these two are talking about? Not the Jordan B Peterson whos lectures I've watched and whos books I've read. Massimo lays out Petersons view of logos (and eros) as a superficial caricature a ten year old could come up with, roughly speaking. He and Bob could perhaps watch JBP's personality lectures before jumping into conclusions. What JBP thinks about differences / similarities between men and women is pretty much mainstream in psychology as far as I can tell.

@colindupee

6 жыл бұрын

"Men are rational and women are emotional." This is either a failure to comprehend JBP or an intentional mischaracterization. Embarrassing either way.

Massimo 'im not resentful' Pigliucci

“Clean your room” means get your life in order from the inside-out before you have the temerity to criticize the world outside your direct influence (eg protesting and activism). The misrepresentations here are pretty disappointing.

@ULTD8

6 жыл бұрын

55:45 they got to a similar thing; voltaire 'tend your garden'

@brianbuch1

5 жыл бұрын

If everyone waited until their lives were completely in order (what are the criteria for noting that) to act as citizens we'd not be living up to our obligations to others. One could wonder if Prof Peterson just doesn't like protests and hopes to curtail them. History discloses few, if any, perfect actors.

@sam_k8868

4 жыл бұрын

Well bias of yours is pretty disappointing ..

Jordan Peterson 🤝 Micah Richards

The running away from responsability I think, it is not a sign of mastery, not saying anything in the cinema, when someone disturbes you with the cellphone, caro Massimo. This is nothing but avoiding responsability for your unique beeing and it's avoiding a chance for the other to learn from you. The question is, in what state of mind youre saying something, with what emotions and with what attachement. Mastery is more a question of the how and not of the if. The winds of challenge will blow ever harder not reacting, and your bamboo will finally brake, when youre not stating your position. In the end the whole forrest will collapse, because you dit not resist. Think, Buddhists also are often not acting, cause they want to escape fastly from their individuality by not living it. What a waste of potential, often a responsability escape, to live ignorantly in a bubble of shallow peace and freedom. Think, we all are incomparable individuals to bring out the best of our blooming uniqueness to enrich the world, not as an ego project, but as the best possibel, together with tutti cuanti.

@jps0117

6 жыл бұрын

Huh?

@j.h252

6 жыл бұрын

You were right, my texting was pretty chaotic. Thanks!

PanENtheism vs pantheism.

L O G O S Logos was always, is always. will be, the inventor, the feeder, the well and the sea, the none and the all, the omni of omnis, the home of all good and the home of all evel, the source of all difference, grounded in one, the source of all other, so we cant see, we only are one, as whole as can be, no difference between, no other, no other, no other, but We. Jacob

@TedsBeach

6 жыл бұрын

J. H yt

Millieux, pronounced mill-yuh not mill-you

Wow. Massimo characterises Peterson as a half mystic crackpot whos ideas are platitudes when right and confused otherwise. Then he goes on to say that Peterson's message has natural appeal to half-wits who do not want to scratch the surface nor care do the thinking by themselves. I find that almost insulting. But not quite. Massimo builds a strawman and then burns it. Hardly I sign of a thinker who's arguments carry weight or should be taken too seriously. I'd say for Massimo that if you don't find Peterson's thoughts interesting enough to listen what he actually says, why bother comment on him at all?

The Logos is much more interesting than Peterson.

This attack on Jordan Peterson unfounded. Purposeful misrepresentation and no source given.

Who is the god Bob keeps talking about? Define your terms man! Better yet, bite your tongue off next time the urge to gurgitate god wells up. goddamn! Otherwise, a very good discussion.

Amateurs on Peterson Well, at the end, two amateurs discuss about Peterson, in a bit arrogant manner I think. JBP is talking about dualism, and comes, what a surprise, to male and female and not to, like you two have stressed, to man and woman. Like Jung came to anima and animus, like the Taoists came to the monade, to YinYang. JBP is not a blinder, you two not either, I honor all three of you, but I think you two dont scratch as deep as Peterson, thats why he is so all over the place. People feel it's not just dry academic talk, it's meaning and substance. His Intensity whyle evolving thoughts is incomparable. You should not think it is the stupidness of his followers, maybe it is yours in this case and maby there is also a bit of this old human unvertue of envy involved mis amigos.