If you enjoyed this clip, drop a like on the video and consider subscribing. Watch all 6 Douglas Murray Pangburn debates here: kzread.info/dash/bejne/n3mnzZWtgNOyo5M.html

@samtheeagle799

4 ай бұрын

monumentally arrogant lol!

@Burtifly

3 ай бұрын

And Douglas Murray

@timjackson4649

3 ай бұрын

Well said. Do you mind if I use that. Not for like money lol, but in an argument, civilly, with an associate

@govindagovindaji4662

3 ай бұрын

3:57 I only saw a 15 minutes clip of Dillahunty w Peterson and did not find it fascinating at all. Judging by the thousands of comments left there neither did anyone else. Jordan was his typical 'interruptus change the subjectus' self. WHY~? do tell, do you guys bother with him at all~? To what end and to whose benefit? That is what I would like to know.

@robynmoase2004

Ай бұрын

Great

The primary mistake you make is taking Jordan Peterson seriously.

@bkfitnessandcombatives8658

4 ай бұрын

A five-year old could have expressed that, yet you blather about being taken seriously. You can’t make this up…🤣🤣

@TheAbsentMinded1

4 ай бұрын

@@bkfitnessandcombatives8658got the sads from that comment 😂

@thrandulfthegreen

4 ай бұрын

Why should you not take Jordan Peterson seriously? I dont understand.

@Sensorama2000

4 ай бұрын

​@@thrandulfthegreenhe sais it to goat people into asking serious questions to then hear himself talk smart. It's ment to be provocative and when people disagree he will talk down on them, belittle them. Common tactic of a narcissist...

@detroitpolak9904

4 ай бұрын

Thank you! He speaks but doesn’t say a damn thing; or he OVER analyzes everything like he’s a deep thinker, but anyone can do that, we don’t because it becomes completely irrelevant to the conversation, problem, etc.

I'm surprised that Jordan says that you can't have morality as an atheist, because he has described how morality can derive and evolve from our biology and social environment.

@theflyingdutchguy9870

5 ай бұрын

there is a reason people call him a drifter. because he seems to quickly change positions based on the audience he is speaking to.

@RatatRatR

5 ай бұрын

It is possible to be too conservative. i.e. because it was a key part in our past, it will always be wrong to move past it. I believe that by now, it is appropriate to acknowledge both the importance that Christianity had in the development of Western ethics and the fact that an increasing number of us no longer need Christianity.

@theflyingdutchguy9870

5 ай бұрын

@@RatatRatR everything that christianity had to do with developement of the world isnt from christianity. most of what makes christianity what it is came from other religions and cultures. if you take away the christianity part, we still have all the good things left. and the bad things done away with. anyone that would have the same beliefs amd traditions as original christians would be in prison in the modern day. from stoning gay people and disobedient children to slavery and the abuse of women.

@krox477

4 ай бұрын

Morality is time and place dependent

@PowerRedBullTypology

4 ай бұрын

I think because he seems to get most of his views from others (like different books on different topics) this can create conflict if he is talking about subjects where 2 of such topics collide, as the ideas of the writers of the of these books may collide too . This can then result in him jumping from one argument to the other even when they seem to conflict. Especially when presented with new information or new ways to look at old information, he seems to struggle. He is best when he can tell a story to an audience without interaction with others, unless these others are dumb tv hosts that try to straw man him (then he is great at handling that). However, it works partly because the other parties are not very intelligent usually.

From the KZread podcast … Richard Dawkins and Michael Shermer discuss Jordan Peterson (2018) … these are the exact words quoted by the Atheist Michael Shermer. “If you asked me, ‘Do you believe in God?’ … the answer would be ‘No.’ If you asked Jordan, ‘Jordan, do you believe in God?’… It would take me 40 hours to answer that question. Alright, if it takes me forty hours to answer, then you’re talking about something completely different.”

@Scawtsauce

3 ай бұрын

"what do you mean by 'do'? what do you mean by 'you'? and most importantly what do you mean by 'believe'? if we can't answer those 4 questions then we can't even agree on anything!!" "that was 3 questions Jordan.." "ahh in reality? perhaps. in the metaphysical? also perhaps. but there in lies the fundamental problem we are dealing with isn't it?" "go f--- yourself Jordan"

@detroitpolak9904

3 ай бұрын

Shermer is so awesome.

@junevandermark952

3 ай бұрын

@@detroitpolak9904 To anyone that believes the universe was created ... Michael Shermer would be considered as being an evil heretic ... offensive to "GOD."

@vinny142

3 ай бұрын

"then you’re talking about something completely different" Peterson is a jerk, but "not talking about the same thing" was exactly the point that Peterson was trying to make. If you ask 100 people what they mean by "god" then you will get 134 different, often conflicting, answers. So why would anybody say "yes" if you don't define what you are talking about when you say "god"? In fact Peterson was also right about the word "believe", because that means something entirely different to everybody too. Some just feel that there is a higher power, others go to church every sunday. So the question "do you believe in god" very easy to answer with "no" and blanket reject all forms of believing in all forms of gods, but what do you do if you are not an atheist? What exactly do you say when you answer "yes" to that question? "yes" I do whatever you mean when you say "believe in god"? Ofcourse Peterson is unable to express himself in any meaningful way, let alone any useful way, but he's not a complete moron... he's just an arse.

@junevandermark952

3 ай бұрын

@@vinny142 OH. Well then ... would you please explain to me what the difference is between a moron and an arse?

Watching this makes me feel like I'm eavesdropping on 2 people having a gossip about someone. 😂

@JesseP.Watson

4 ай бұрын

Mmm. You're not wrong there.

@janaanne8382

4 ай бұрын

The debates/conversations in the first place are public. To have commentary on the debate is reasonable. If you listen to very many of Peterson's conversations with people, he mentions/denigrates/puts down/praises Sam Harris and/or Richard Dawkins so many times, I feel like knocking him upside the head sometimes. When his battery runs down on his own BS, he points to the "New Atheists" for ammunition. I think a review such as this one is fair game.

@becr9369

4 ай бұрын

@@janaanne8382 ... I didn't say it wasn't fair game.. i just felt like I was eavesdropping.

@janaanne8382

4 ай бұрын

. . . @@becr9369 . . . and fair enough.

@jamesmcinnis208

4 ай бұрын

You feel that way because that is precisely what's happening. Even though I lean towards Matt's point of view, it's unfair of them (the host, mostly) to speculate on why JP clings to his religious beliefs. That is a conversation that should involve him.

That debate (between Matt and JP) was embarrassing. JP is used to talking with other public intellectuals who are very cordial and patient with him, but Matt showed him no mercy and exposed his nonsense. It's like JP was naked out there, it was hard to watch.

@Csio12

3 ай бұрын

I enjoyed it thoroughly. Sick of Jordans attitude eg calling bible the biblical corpus just to impress.

@jordanexploded

3 ай бұрын

Yeah but he suddenly found himself with a big conservative Christian fan base so he is pandering to keep the dough coming in

@mikeo9074

3 ай бұрын

I think he’s more used to talking with childish people who want to discredit and attack him, he couldn’t find himself in the serious context of that debate. Which is nothing strange for me, he spent his last 10+ years fighting with stupid people mostly, didn’t have much time arguing with intelligent people. He’s smart only when there are no really smart people in the room.

@inoderlulzer5163

3 ай бұрын

Because he got no morals.

@huntermathias5353

3 ай бұрын

@074 Exactly. He's known for "destroying" stupid people in debates to which anyone with common sense could do the same. I like Jordan but it's annoying when he tries to have actual debates with true intellectuals when he clearly isn't prepared for it, he needs to understand that his philosophical word salads aren't gonna overwhelm real intelligent debaters and leave them speechless in the way it does with the typical clueless goons that he typically likes to "debate" lol.

Never encountered an intellectual who got everything right. From Buddha to Hitchens to Peterson.

@bradwillis6591

6 ай бұрын

If you think Jordan Peterson is an intellectual, I think you need to study up on the Dunning-Kruger curve.

@SyringeSem

6 ай бұрын

​@@bradwillis6591Hes by definition an intellectual. Just because you disagree with him doesnt mean hes not. He has the resume.

@user-bx4px7lj4x

6 ай бұрын

No one ever gets everything right.

@AT-jq2ve

6 ай бұрын

@@bryanutility9609 That's a tell for literally the opposite

@pascaltomasovic3586

6 ай бұрын

@@bradwillis6591 oh the irony. it's always the people who just recently discovered the dunning-kruger effect who can't stop talking about it as if they were so genius to know of it. :)

I have always been impressed when someone has the ability to communicate complicated ideas in simple words. Extraordinary is that person's reach.

@xChrisDarko

Ай бұрын

Its the accent. No British scholars take him seriously 👍

Peterson knows what sells. I loved and adored him and clung to everything that left his mouth for years. But he made a turn I cannot follow. He is well aware of what he is doing.

@marcomoreno6748

3 ай бұрын

No. He never changed trajectory. You simply chose not to follow him off the cliff he was always heading towards.

@kuidaorekitchen5850

2 ай бұрын

Why???

@thebreadtable4880

2 ай бұрын

​@@kuidaorekitchen5850 His whole brand is reliant upon pushing existing right wing narratives irrespective of the truth.

@HkFinn83

2 ай бұрын

Cosplay intellectual

@MrBekliyom

2 ай бұрын

@@marcomoreno6748 In hindsight your comment makes sense. But nevertheless I think in the beginning he genuinely wanted to move something. No he is just selling what pays best and trying to build a brand.

"Somebody you know, who has never read a book, can be the lovliest person you know." This line at the end by Mr Murray makes him as quite affable. Likeable even.

@morticiag

6 ай бұрын

Most Atheists have never read a book , but I wouldn't call them lovely. 😅😅

@adamgates1142

6 ай бұрын

@morticiag Funny because polls done about religious knowledge place non-believers at the tippy top. Why would this be?

@JesusSavesSouls

6 ай бұрын

@@adamgates1142 What "polls" are these? Bring evidence for your claim.

@steven5054

6 ай бұрын

Until you remember what a right-wing bigot he is.

@landspide

6 ай бұрын

Affable indeed.... and a true intellectual.

I think what Peterson means by "People don't really believe God exists" is that they don't live as though it's true, they don't fear Him, they don't weigh the implications of what it means if it is true.

@daycrow8651

6 ай бұрын

Yeah i was going to say christian is weird being the one religion were if everything in the bible happened today people would be terrified shitless. It 's one of those " theory vs practice " scenarios.

@nerdyali4154

6 ай бұрын

Which in itself is a silly thing to say because it discounts any other basis for morality.

@jesuschrist-alphaomega

6 ай бұрын

Fear a God? Your words? When love is based in fear. That's evil and want nothing to do with that God. Or any gods.

@fortusvictus8297

6 ай бұрын

Actions not words, values not sentiments. And yes, I do believe it is a rare person who actually lives as if they believe there is a God and they will ultimately be responsible for all of their choices. People most often believe in God the way a football fan believe in their team. They will defend criticism and they will wear all the things, but they are not practicing to become a competitor or actually doing anything that would actually help their team win.

@der_kanadier

6 ай бұрын

@@jesuschrist-alphaomega it can better be translated as "healthy reverence at the awe of God"

JP lost his mind from benzos and too much time online. Not only that but his daughter has increasingly taken over his life and she is a psychological mess. Its like when the barbers kid is the one who needs a haircut the most.

@1984isnotamanual

3 ай бұрын

I didn’t know his daughter was a psychological mess, what have you seen that indicates that?

@elmango705

3 ай бұрын

His daughter has taken over his life?? Psychological mess?? What do you even mean?? I’m sure you as a Harvard educated doctor of psychology can evaluate her state of mind better than he can…

@sole__doubt

3 ай бұрын

@@1984isnotamanual Her own words about being in mental institution.

@sole__doubt

3 ай бұрын

@@elmango705 "His daughter has taken over his life??" Yes she handles all his appearances. She approves them or they dont happen. "Psychological mess??" Her own words tell us she is damaged to the point of needing to be in a mental institution. "I’m sure you as a Harvard educated doctor of psychology can evaluate her state of mind better than he can…" Credential elitism aside being removed from the subject is often the best way of assessing a persons mental state, at least from a cursory state.

@elmango705

3 ай бұрын

@@sole__doubt Her managing his appearances is a sign of her taking over in his life? That’s just a business relationship inside the family because hopefully you can trust your family better than strangers. Any quasi celebrity like Jordan Peterson would have an agent and they would also not take all the requests that come in. An agent would also make the decisions for him or at least he should listen to them. So if she acts as his agent, where’s the problem? Not exactly, Mikhaila said in her podcast that she WAS depressed, mainly because of her many autoimmune diseases. But what she also talks about all the time is how her all meat diet practically made all of her symptoms go away and at the same time her mental health got way better. Same for Jordan btw. I don’t know exactly what you mean by elitism, just saying I trust the judgement of a clinician who taught at Harvard and has years of experience with thousands of clients more than yours about the mental state of Mikhaila

"Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool." Voltaire

@Thor-Orion

2 ай бұрын

The same guy who said the HRE wasn’t an empire. But Frederick Barbarossa was 1,000 times the man Voltaire could ever dream of being and WAS an emperor of an empire.

@dan8346

2 ай бұрын

"Assertion without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." Also Voltaire

@patrickmurphy2443

Ай бұрын

That is so stupid i pity anybody that stupid

@johneastwood3039

Ай бұрын

Religion is a great thing. A belief in God can cause your subconscious mind to perform miracles.

@miquelr2353

Ай бұрын

​@@johneastwood3039miracles like... ?

I absolutely love Matt. I used to watch him on "The Atheist Experience" during a period of my life when I was shedding my fundamentalist Christian beliefs. I even went to Houston to attend a live filming of the show. Prince of a man.

@RoamingHeathen

3 ай бұрын

You would have had a hard time watching in live in Houston ….

@Patrick-uh8xj

3 ай бұрын

So you become fanatic to Christianity and then a fanatic over atheism. I think you need to find your own identity.

@nixworld767

3 ай бұрын

@@Simrealism Correction. Austin....it was 17 years ago.

@nixworld767

3 ай бұрын

@@RoamingHeathen Austin...it was 2007.

@nixworld767

3 ай бұрын

@@Patrick-uh8xj Sure did. About the same time you became an internet troll. You found your identity. Congratulations winner.

On a side note, i couldn't help but noticed that this stage need a sweep and a mop

@LeeZaslofsky

4 ай бұрын

Well, what are you waiting for? Get busy! And put some elbow grease into it!

@testlab6643

3 ай бұрын

Feminism rules! You go girl!

@1984isnotamanual

3 ай бұрын

Nah it’s fine. It’s just a special flooring style called “chalkboard” 😁

@alphakevin687

3 ай бұрын

Peterson can mop it, he is yapping about cleaning all the time, and it will keep him off Twitter and benzos for at least a few minutes.

@Interwurlitzer

3 ай бұрын

Set the world in perfect order before you criticise your house🙃

I was internally emotionally tortured as a christian. The guilt of questioning was very painful. As an atheist I am afraid of death but I am FREE.

@davycrockett8886

6 ай бұрын

Why were you tortured as a Christian?

@tonyabrown7796

6 ай бұрын

The bible tells us to question. Why would you feel guilt for that?

@billyb4790

4 ай бұрын

@@tonyabrown7796 it does? Can you cite numerous examples?

@davycrockett8886

4 ай бұрын

Closed minded stereotypical Christianity doesn't encourage questioning. Enlightened Christianity does. Atheism doesn't encourage questioning in regards to the spiritual, it just says it doesn't exist. Atheism is therefore extremely closed minded too.

@Bungaloo

4 ай бұрын

Epicurus had the answer 300 years bc. Death is nothing to us. ‘I was not, I am, I will not be.

He realized being crazy was way better clickbait....

@markfeland2285

3 ай бұрын

Certainly more profitable

Morality doesn't come from religion, that's what organised religion wishes you to believe in order to strengthen its position. Morality is part of the in-built survival system for the species. This is why morality continues to change and religions do too, despite the fact that their texts can't be updated alongside our rapidly evolving civilisation, but at best reinterpreted. These texts hold a powerful sway because we assume that our reasoning is infallible and it neatly collects excess variables within our lives we can't understand into a single explanation, i.e. faith.

@LeeZaslofsky

6 ай бұрын

Religion is a way of expressing the wisdom and the fantasy of a community. It sanctifies the community and its moral code, which helps the community to enforce its code and demand sacrifice from its members for the good of the community. The contempt for "organized religion" expressed by many people is a statement that the "sanctification" offered by these institutions is no longer effective -- it cannot command compliance or sacrifice. Its mythology no longer convinces or inspires. In a consumer society, where individualism DOES command compliance and DOES inspire people, many people substitute individualist consumerism for religion. They even apply it to religion, as with "church shopping" or enjoying performances by "preachers" who own megachurches and appear on TV. Are shopping malls the cathedrals of consumer society? You bet they are.

@zaydeshaddox7015

4 ай бұрын

One of the things that atheists get wrong about faith is equating it with belief and it's not. Belief is just an opinion without facts supporting it and it tends to be a reactive function in the brain. But faith is a very proactive determination to trust in a greater thing, to relax and not stress out and to even be okay when things DON'T work out. There are Christians who yammer about faith all the time yet utterly fail to demonstrate it. My grandmother was one of these. She was an archetypal church lady, lecturing everyone about Jesus and God but she lived her life with more fear than most other people do, which caused her to become very controlling. So she believed but had no faith. We are such silly creatures.

@LeeZaslofsky

4 ай бұрын

That sounds like a sermon from a liberal minded, modern Minister preaching to a congregation of college educated middle class people. They love that kind of fluff, which means nothing, but sounds so very reassuring and "intellectual". Playing around with definitions of vague terms like "faith" and "belief" is fun, but it means nothing. if you "believe' in ghosts, you will have emotional reactions to them, and will accept various events as "proof" that they exist. Then you may wish to propitiate them so they don't harm you or your family, and you invent rituals or prayers or activities that you hope they will like. You may come to have a deep faith in their existence and how to please them. These may take the form of moral teachings, such as not eating beans because the ghosts don't like it, or being polite to strangers so the ghosts don't get angry with you. You may get a warm feeling of security from you relations with ghosts, as you find that your rituals and moral behaviour please them and they communicate this to you in ghostly ways that no one can see, but which you feel very strongly. You find that when you explain this to others, they are skeptical, but you KNOW that you're right. And you are generous to those who don't agree with you, because that is what is pleasing to the ghosts. if you substitute some word meaning "God", such as "Jesus" or "Allah" or "Shiva" etc, this is what "faith" is all about. Without belief there can be no faith, for no one will have 'faith" in something they don't believe exists. From what you say, "faith" for you is an emotional response to a belief that you have, which is shared by others, and which can be enacted using certain rituals common to your group. Jesus was no so interested in rituals, or in defining "faith" as opposed to "belief". He was more concerned with encouraging people to become more intimate with God through private prayer, and urging them to follow some moral principles and practices he described, often using parables to show what he meant. Unfortunately his parables deal with the agricultural society that existed in his time and place, so they are often a bit obscure to us. I admire Jesus and his moral teachings. He was a man of great moral insight, courage and integrity. It is no wonder that his friends were reluctant to admit that he was dead and gone, and attempted to preserve his memory and teachings after he was executed. However I don't think he was divine, and I don't think he thought he was divine either. For him to claim divinity would have been blasphemy, as the Jewish God is One.

@jamesedwards.1069

4 ай бұрын

God doesn't rely on what we think of as "morality" to judge us. God judges us based on whether we receive the love of the truth or not. "Morality" is merely the system of principles that form the philosophical framework for the practical rules that people rely on to allow society to exist. Moral principles don't really change, how the moral principles are applied certainly does. Stealing a horse in the Old West got you hanged, and rightly so in my opinion, but, stealing a horse nowadays is still illegal but nowhere near a capital offense, and rightly so, in my opinion.

@zaydeshaddox7015

4 ай бұрын

@@jamesedwards.1069 moral principles may not change but they are varied and not universal. People rationalize morality for all kinds of reasons. EDIT: And some morals can even contradict others. Everyone has different views of when violence is actually justified. What you describe is an ideal but in real life, moral principles are used for evil all the time. Case in point: the rampant child abuse that occurs within the Evangelical Christian populace. They ALWAYS have a moral justification for it. Also, the notion that God judges us by any criteria at all is purely a human opinion. People don't even agree on the definition of God.

Best thing about this conversation is the conversations taking place afterwards!

Truth, like facts, are things that exist regardless of one's belief.

@AngryReptileKeeper

4 ай бұрын

It's like what I like to tell people: Believing something does not make it so.

@streetaware

4 ай бұрын

that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality. noun: the truth

@jameswarrren2545

3 ай бұрын

"There are two sorts of truth: trivialities, where opposites are clearly absurd, and profound truths, recognised by the fact that the opposite is also a profound truth." --Quantum physicist Niels Bohr

@justadad6677

3 ай бұрын

Not only that it is only through that you can find Justice.

@damienkarras8552

3 ай бұрын

@@AngryReptileKeeper Yes but it implies that if something exists, it does even if you do not believe in it.

I believe Peterson is genuinely terrified at how quickly the new/old genocidal hate is moving our way. I see so many people stunned, unable to comprehend how this could happen. We know better. We said "never again." Peterson has studied this for years, and it caught him off guard.

@steven5054

6 ай бұрын

Too bad he doesn't examine the hate that he is peddling for Shapiro and friends.

@PhonoDirect

6 ай бұрын

This.

@steveglynn1006

6 ай бұрын

He's a grifter, there's nothing else there.

@TheBaconWizard

6 ай бұрын

Well he's doing his bit to advance it...

@jordanthoms887

6 ай бұрын

@@steven5054 wat hate? exactly?

Peterson does not claim to have worked out what is or is not god. And I like that, because that leaves room to learn something new. Matt and Co. have drawn a line under the whole subject and so reject the possibility for further exploration of the subject.

@LeeZaslofsky

6 ай бұрын

Peterson is old enough to have come to some conclusion about the existence of God, and the definition of God. "God" is not an obscure term. Does he accept God as defined by the religion in which he was brought up? How about the religion of so many of his admirers, right wing "Christianity". Does he agree with their definition?

@paulywauly6063

6 ай бұрын

@@LeeZaslofsky NO he doesn't .. and their is no simple and singular definition of Christianity anyhow

@muddywitch9016

6 ай бұрын

@@LeeZaslofsky Well, I’m about the same age as Peterson and the older I get, the less I think I know! As for the actual definition of god, the ‘fridge magnet’ definition many ask for would satisfy only a child but that is insufficient for me to answer honestly.

@alexandremuise8889

6 ай бұрын

I've never met a New Atheist with an open mind. They are NEVER wrong about anything and they already KNOW EVERYTHING.

@muddywitch9016

6 ай бұрын

@@alexandremuise8889 Even though Matt is always stating he is open to new evidence I doubt if that would actually happen. However Matt has never struck me as someone who would be truly open to the prospect.

I just find it incredibly arrogant that some humans believe they have a god, which is created in their image and that is the standard throughout the entire universe. Carl Sagans "Pale Blue Dot" speech displays human arrogance perfectly.

@johneastwood3039

Ай бұрын

If you were going create life, you would most likely do it in your own image. You would give it arms, legs, mouth, teeth etc. It isn't arrogant, what's arrogant is your self-righteousness, your sneering at people with different beliefs to your own.

Good humanist sentiments expressed by both parties in this conversation.

@Yosef9438

3 ай бұрын

Murray not looking good on the humanist front when it comes to Gaza. He's balls deep for Israel. It's sickening.

@banishedbr

3 ай бұрын

@@Yosef9438 sadge

Dillahunty says he is confused and more than a little irritated. Situation normal

@weizenobstmusli8232

6 ай бұрын

It depends on what you understand by the term "normal". 😂

@Aponysomewhere8042

6 ай бұрын

😆

I am not religious. That's an uneasy admission. With age, I have become convinced that a significant segment of our population _needs_ good religion. *The absence of good religion plainly results in psychological malnutrition in those people.* They suffer when it's not there. And it's very, very difficult to say with confidence that YOU are not one who needs good religion. Maybe you don't need good religion. It's hubris to insist that others don't need good religion. That insistence is often destructive.

@andralfoo

6 ай бұрын

example of good religion?

@LeeZaslofsky

6 ай бұрын

For most people, their religion is an expression of their personality. Nice people believe in nice versions of the local religion; nasty people believe in a nasty version. The specifics of the religion through which they express themselves is largely based on the accident of birth; sometimes people "change religion", but their version of the newly religion expresses their personality just as the old one did. Religion is a token of membership in a community; the nature of the religion expresses the nature of the community, and sanctifies the community, integrating it into Nature. The best way to understand an individual's religion is to learn about his or her personality and community, rather than to examine its mythology, which is often unfamiliar to "believers".

@weizenobstmusli8232

6 ай бұрын

Because they don't have sufficient education?

@eogg25

6 ай бұрын

@@andralfooDid you ever do something wrong or as a child lie about something. The Catholic religion had an answer for that, Confession they said is good for the soul, just say 3 hail Maries and you felt a load taken off of your back, it was like going to a shrink. It worked for us little kids but then you grow up.

@Cardboxx

6 ай бұрын

​@@eogg25 Also made us terrified of having "nothing to confess" or having to invent "sin" to not get berated because you didn't confess them. Constant reminder that you are ALWAYS sinning and guilty of something, no matter how hard you try.

If anyone wants to know how Jordan thinks about things, just read his first book "Maps of Meaning : The architecture of belief" the way he looks at the world has always been there, in his first book, published in 1999. This whole conversation is so frustrating because Matt just simply doesn't get it...

@braindeadjester

3 ай бұрын

Most don't. It's sad especially when they character assassinate him.

@timothyglassbrook4886

Ай бұрын

This is exactly how I feel every time I look at comments bashing his mode of communication. He's admittedly not the most clear in his arguments, but by and large they just seem to go over everyone's head and the commenters take it as him being inept or something. Unfortunate they don't understand what he's saying

@faintanomaly

Ай бұрын

@@timothyglassbrook4886 Fortunately, Jordan will be on the right side of history. I think in time many will come to realise it. I see wisdom in his words, but in Matt and many other Atheists I just see this reductionist simple mindedness, it's just lazy thinking...

I actually used to admire peterson a bit back in 2015-2016. He was a decent psychologist who gave decent and solid advice. He has since turned into a major political pundit and sacrificed any credibility for fame. I still maintain his old lectures are worth a listen, just don’t take anything he says outside of psychology seriously.

@garysanders8350

3 ай бұрын

Poor lefty

@pixie3458

2 ай бұрын

I agree.. I really enjoy the psychology lectures which seem so well founded, but when he veers into religion his intellectual grounding is lost.

@garysanders8350

2 ай бұрын

@@pixie3458 You are too dim to understand

@sambeatty2312

2 ай бұрын

@@pixie3458 exactly. Also, why would I listen to a psychologist about the WEF or climate change. He gets away with pretending to be a highly educated intellectual on subjects he’s just not familiar with.

Jordan believes that the UTILITY of god(s) outweighs the question of is/are god(s) literally real. Its similar to the religious argument that goes: "The impulse towards magical explanations wouldn't exist if god(s) didn't put it in our brains. We have a god-shaped hole."

@pavld335

6 ай бұрын

yeah it's stupid and incredibly shallow.

@AlexKomnenos

6 ай бұрын

And yet ironically so does the idea that humans can create a moral framework out of thin air…

@nerdyali4154

6 ай бұрын

But he doesn't. If that was all he professed to believing then there would be no issue.

@TeleMA50c

6 ай бұрын

I think his idea is that the domains of empirical truth and the transcendent might be complimentary parts of the same whole.

@gking407

6 ай бұрын

It’s presuppositional retardation as expected from an atheistic theist 😂

I'm not sure either of these two have thought long and hard about what the most important human traits are. I don't know why they didn't say honesty. The thing about honesty is that it is a trait that you can value in people you agree with and also those you disagree with. You can value the honesty of those who like you and also of those who dislike you. I have had enemies or dislikers in my life, but very poignant to me was a gentleman I worked with who I hardly ever spoke to, but I felt he didn't like me. One day, I felt it had gone on long enough and I asked him straight out "Why don't you like me?" He rewarded my honesty with his own. "I just don't like you." Though he didn't get me any closer to understanding why he didn't (perhaps even he didn't know), he curiously gained my respect, and in a weird way, my trust. You see, you can even trust your enemies if they are honest. It seems to me, on the other hand, that deception is the root of much evil and destruction, so much of it completely unnecessary.

@srkibble

6 ай бұрын

The problem with honesty is that it requires the person to have an awareness of what they're talking about. This is obvious in the case of words, as many people use words without really knowing what they mean/imply. But even beyond just words, you'd be surprised how many people, even grown adults, genuinely can't recognize when they hate someone, when they're sad, when they're angry, etc.

@sandarahcatmom9897

6 ай бұрын

@@srkibble. Boy that’s some hard won insight, eh?

@Stierenkloot

6 ай бұрын

Dishonesty is the most human thing of all

@eogg25

6 ай бұрын

President Kennedy once said, Forgive your enemies but remember their names.

@Jcs57

4 ай бұрын

He said he just doesn’t like you without any context. He may not like you because you drive a Ford and not a Toyota and you would express respect and trust for that. That is exactly how you end up with people like the Orange Jesus.

HE WENT NUTS

JP’s problem is that he’s emotionally dishonest, not to mention his anger.

"He who knows he believes is less dangerous than he who believes he knows,"

@OoO-rf2gt

6 ай бұрын

I know you think you said something here. But you only made your English teacher cry.

@Jdanielsson76

6 ай бұрын

​@@OoO-rf2gt Probably, but if I would have written it in my mother tongue you would probably not understood it at all.

@OoO-rf2gt

6 ай бұрын

Correct. That would have been even more stupid.

@Jdanielsson76

6 ай бұрын

@@OoO-rf2gt You are obviously someone who believe you know

@OoO-rf2gt

6 ай бұрын

@@Jdanielsson76 1. Stop liking your own comments. It a tad ironic. 2. Why do you hate your English teacher so much. 3. It's "believes he knows", and yes you are correct. I am fluent in English.

I was a big fan of Dr. Peterson when he was a lecturer and an academic. His personal beliefs didn't steer his words, they were underlying them - but in a kind way. Now, he's closer to a preacher than he is to a scholar - and even if I agree with a lot of points on view on society, I can't stand the sanctimonious tone that wasn't there before. His story is very sad, and I can see how this would have a massive impact - but it didn't make him more ope-minded, contrary, unfortunately. Years ago I would feel that he would accept me whatever my views would be, now? It seems like if you're not with him, you're against him. And I really don't buy the crying. If feels more like self-pity than genuine compassion. That isn't the man, that helped me out years ago.

@jonathonhanson7278

6 ай бұрын

It's because he got some much love from the right and hate from the left. This caused him to stray away from what made him great.

@Milchi7

6 ай бұрын

Exactly, Dr. Peterson is a genius but when it comes to Religion and Modern Relationships hes flailing concepts around that make no sense.

@t9j6c6j51

6 ай бұрын

I feel that his success and fame have gone to his head. I’d rather watch his old stuff than his new.

@nsf001-3

6 ай бұрын

It's really dumb for someone who doesn't understand The Bible to be a preacher

@JH-lb3kc

6 ай бұрын

I also listened to his university lectures from 2016-2017. Brilliant. After that, it's hit or miss. His best stuff is from his professor days.

Jordan Peterson has decided himself to be the paramount speaker of truth via his belief in god He responds to an opposite point of view as being too painful for him to hear or ever appreciate He wiggles in his seat , bows his head as he displays his apparent anger and disgust via both his body language and expression It’s as though he has met with a lower and lesser human than himself and he can’t stand for their perspective to insult his superior & just mind I used to listen with interest I now feel distracted by his discomfort at anything other than than hearing himself speak …. sometimes bloody endlessly !

@Djscott2728

3 ай бұрын

It's because he says something logical and is always met with half baked circular nonsense... and no one knows how to reply in manner more than outright insulting... it would make me uncomfortable as well...

The conversation flow of "Atheism is bad because without religion you can't live ethically", "But I am an atheist and I live ethically", "Then you aren't really an atheist", is so frustratingly (and laughably) common. It's one of the simplest examples of circular reasoning imaginable, completely and blatantly flawed, to the extent that I really can't respect the mind of anyone who trots it around like a prize hog at a fair. There are myriad reasons to doubt Peterson's personal ideology (and, yes, even his body of research!), but this is almost certainly the most blatant.

@grahvis

3 ай бұрын

Sounds like flat earther reasoning. An actual example. Equatorial telescope mounts work The Earth is flat Therefore, equatorial telescope mounts work on a flat earth

@timothyglassbrook4886

Ай бұрын

I think his reasoning is something to the effect that morality is inherently religious, and that by virtue or that, pure atheism has no morality. So in your example I think what he would say is that you don't believe in a god, or a specific dogma, but the fact that you believe in any system of moral good and evil, or the intrinsic worth of life or something like that, is for you the same thing as a religion, because it's essentially a faith based argument. To believe that good and evil exists is still belief, even if we don't slap a label on it. I think that's more what his argument is.

@grahvis

Ай бұрын

@@timothyglassbrook4886 . Whereas in reality, morality is an evolved survival trait in any group of social animals.

@timothyglassbrook4886

Ай бұрын

@@grahvis empathy is an evolved trait, but I find it difficult to find any group of animals that don't resort to the same types of wars and murders that humans always have. The evolution is insufficient so far

@grahvis

Ай бұрын

@@timothyglassbrook4886 . One social group may be at odds with another for some reason, but generally they don't attack each other within the group.

It seems to me that the God Jordan Peterson talks about is the God that he feels is within us all as individuals, our conscience.

@dahlumski88

6 ай бұрын

I'd rather say consciousness, but hey, words are only symbols of the truth.

@deejin25

6 ай бұрын

Jordan Peterson is a post modernist who is also dishonest and far less intelligent than he says he is.

@dfr6663

6 ай бұрын

It "seems" to you that's what he "feels" that "god" is? Why doesn't he ever say that?

@chesterdonnelly1212

6 ай бұрын

​@@dahlumski88 I think you're both right. Our conscience, our consciousness, and our subconscious nature. Probably our history and culture too. He could clarify it in a few sentences. I'm not sure why he doesn't.

@jackeagleeye3453

6 ай бұрын

I'm surprised people still follow Peterson after all the crazy things he did

Peterson started being confused as soon as he started talking about everything, literally everything. Even about topics he does'nt have a clue about.

@AtanuKDey

6 ай бұрын

I agree. His fame and fortune went to his head. He began to think that he was an expert in all domains of human knowledge. He lacks humility.

@ronaldrrootiii6040

6 ай бұрын

​@@AtanuKDeyseriously I couldn't even comprehend the insanity of what he was saying during the entire debate. All I know is that there is a lot of large words and none of it really supported anything about God or the Bible which I don't think he believes he just thinks that his fans like it and that he thinks maybe it's good for society. But wow I literally tried to watch the debate more than once and truly pay attention and it's like he was purposely being a lunatic to sound smart at the same time

@LeeZaslofsky

6 ай бұрын

He is confused, but he uses his confusion to pose as a "questioning intellectual" with an "open mind". This impresses his fans tremendously, and has brought him fame and fortune.

@raia9

2 ай бұрын

Yes I think his fame has sadly gone to his head - losing or lost his humility.

@timothyglassbrook4886

Ай бұрын

I think it's more that most people didn't follow his train of thought, which admittedly was not well communicated, and part of that is probably that they're not more familiar with his other works, lectures, etc. I tend to find him interesting so I've seen a bit of his work and was able to follow along well enough

Educational credentials are seen as indicators of individual merit and diplomas grant access to social and economic positions in society, but they come accompany by ideologies implanted by agendas to exclude those that don't go along with the dogmas of privilege cemented on meritocracy as being the foremost human value.

I'm mostly an Atheist except on Lottery night 😂, I want to be an Atheist that lives in the western Christian world, unfortunately most of civilisation still needs an imaginary friend who sets out rules to which they live, just be thankful that their imaginary friend has mostly chilled out and pray or hope it stays that way

@isabellawoods8718

4 ай бұрын

Hardly imaginary when you examine the amazing life of Jesus, and examine the lives of those who convert to Christianity, and their testimony of how God (who is real for intellectuals too, btw (see C.S. Lewis)) has made a difference to them.

@jj4791

4 ай бұрын

Jesus founded a death cult. He was also sent here and slaughtered as "the perfect sacrifice" to appease his fathers anger at the world he himself created with a propensity to sin. And let the devil loose onto it among men.

@Zaprozhan

4 ай бұрын

@@isabellawoods8718 CS Lewis is the most entertaining and eloquent apologist that ever lived. He was still wrong.

There’s is nothing that Matt says that one can’t learn in an undergraduate logic textbook. He never speaks on psychology, literature, history, evolutionary biology

@andrewdunn8778

4 ай бұрын

Which means that, unlike Peterson, he never horrendously exaggerates or misleads on those subjects.

@sharkaspree8148

Ай бұрын

@@andrewdunn8778 Nice opinion

@cm9241

4 күн бұрын

Is there a point to this comment? Undergraduate logic is all it takes to see through Peterson's grift?

I quit smoking in the most anticlimactic way imaginable. I smoked less and less with the intention to never quit, because I actually enjoyed smoking my choice of Virginia-Burley mix in hand-rolled cigarettes. However, one day, when I was supposed to get life insurance for a house we bought, I looked at the difference on payments and thought, that's as good a reason as any. When I tried smoking again after having decided, cigarettes no longer tasted nice. I will enjoy a pipe or a cigar from time to time.

@nicoledickens2366

6 ай бұрын

Every 10 years I buy a pack and halfway through the first one ..."I hate this..."!

@benbunyip

6 ай бұрын

I don’t know whether you’re fortunate or strong. My brother is having a terrible time trying to give up.

@Ixnatifual

6 ай бұрын

That's highly mystical, daszier. You are basically a shaman now

@daszieher

6 ай бұрын

@@Ixnatifual 😂

@daszieher

6 ай бұрын

@@benbunyip I guess very fortunate, or just not very addicted to things. For sure not mystical or believing. Quite the contrary, actually. I don't even see myself in a position to give your brother any advice, but to think about it rationally (as in: who makes the money on smokes, who carries the bodily harm, how good do industrially manufactured cigarettes actually taste

JP is smart enough to know that its all lies but he wants to live forever.

@SwedeSpeeder

3 ай бұрын

Jordan has decided grifting off gullible right wingers is his ticket to salvation (and riches).

@swellerferret2506

3 ай бұрын

@@SwedeSpeederSounds like something the prophet of Islam would do. And I’m serious, could the same be said about the two of you?

@DanielGarcia-rx3kt

3 ай бұрын

​@@swellerferret2506probably not because they don't have the actual influence Peterson or a prophet of Islam would have over others. They deserve to be properly scrutinized *because* of the influence they have.

@chrisa.4384

3 ай бұрын

​@SwedeSpeeder sure, his work as a therapist is grifting. The way he breaks down, is emotionally unstable himself with an incredibly dark sense of the world are all fake tactics to buy appeal and not at all sincere! JP has perfect health and no depression confirmed by you!

@banishedbr

3 ай бұрын

he's on youtube being shamed, he's probably going for a long time after death hu3

"You can't quit smoking without having a mystical experience."...I quit smoking because I kept waking up at night because I was not able to breath anymore. It was fairly easy after that. I mean if the fear of dying a horrible death is a "mystical" experience, then fair game...but as someone who studied some of the Mystics from the early European middle ages I can say with quite certainty, that that's not what they were talking about.

I love Dr. Peterson, and listening to his lectures has helped me tremendously. However, I do have to say, Mr. Dillahunty exactly identified the three main problems I also have with Dr. Peterson. (1) He is very hesitant to admit, that religious dogmatism can go too far, let alone that many people who call themselves religious are in fact very rigid, dogmatic, cannot think critically or independently, believe their particular holy book to be entirely, absolutely, and literally true, and feel quite justified to force their own views onto others. True, many of these criticisms equally apply to many adherents of left-wing ideologies, but they are non the less also true on the religious front, and it is frustrating to not get an agreement on this point. (2) He uses the word “religious” different from most other people. Most people mean by religious that someone believes the things a particular religion generally preaches or at least enacts its rituals and holidays, but Peterson uses the word to mean that a person has any strongly held convictions / axiomatic beliefs about reality or ethics. Examples he uses are the orderliness and intelligibility of the universe or the sanctity of human life. Thus he ends up calling self-proclaimed atheists religious, or claims that atheism will automatically lead to murder and genocide, which understandably angers and confuses many people. (3) He refuses to clearly state, that men cannot come back from the dead or that virgins cannot give birth to children. It lets one wonder, what he actually believes about the structure of material reality and on what shared basis one is actually having a conversation. I think Douglas is, as ever so often, right, Peterson is afraid, that people could lose their faith in the stories that underpin our civilization, and that this could lead to the fall of western civilization (see Nietzsche’s point about the death of God). But still, his refusal to clearly state, that these stories are purely metaphorically true, makes high level intellectual discussions difficult. This, however, has very much to do with the problem Harris and Peterson had with defining the word truth. -- I seem to be somewhat eccentric, because I absolutely loved the first Harris-Peterson Discussion. What is the nature of truth, that is pure Philosophy! -- Anyways, I think both Harris and Peterson failed to acknowledge the valid points the other one was making in that conversation. We do call statements, that accurately describe reality true, and Peterson should have just agreed to that. But the statement that one “should not try to cross Smallpox and Ebola” is also true, even though it is not a description of reality, and Harris should have equally agreed to that. One of Petersons main teachings is, that stories can also be true and that we cannot live in the world without stories. Human beings have biological drives as well as reason. Unlike other animals, we don’t just have to blindly follow the dictates of our biological drives. We can temporarily override them and act as our conscious mind deems best. But, at the same time, we are not pure consciousnesses, floating through space, completely free from material needs. Our biological drives have to be satisfied sooner or later, or else we die or go insane. Still, the ability to temporarily override our biological urges sets up a terrible problem for human beings: we can never actually be sure that we currently have the right aim / that we are currently doing the best thing we could be doing. And because reality is way too complex for our poor conscious minds to fully grasp, we necessarily have to rely on heuristics in order to be able to act at all. Human beings have, ever since they existed, observed each other and told stories about what they saw. Stories about particularly good or bad outcomes were particularly memorable, and they got collected, combined, filtered, edited, recombined, etc. This is how, over the course of hundreds and thousands of years, religious systems emerged. A religious system is a whole corpus of stories, rituals, rules, and symbols, which is designed to make people act, such that their lives turn out well individual as well as collectively. But today, many people, like Harris and Dillahunty, belittle the value of stories, symbols, images, and metaphors. They call facts (correct descriptions of material reality) *actually true*, and stories or images *only metaphorically true*. But Peterson believes exactly the opposite. He insists, that the stories people believe are more important than scientific facts. He insists, that science as a human activity can only take place inside a system of ethical values, which necessarily has to be grounded in a system of stories. But Harris believes, that values can be derived from facts, that ethics is nested inside of science. So, while they fought about the definition of truth, what they were actually fighting over was, I think, the differences in their world views. What is more fundamental, facts or stories, rationality or experience? Unfortunately, however, they fought a linguistic proxy war, instead of addressing this question directly.

@dakota2327

6 ай бұрын

This was a fantastic summary of Peterson's worldview and the problems inherent in his debate with Harris. Spot on.

@texasrefugee7888

6 ай бұрын

Holy moly, you're just as long-winded as he is.

@dieterrosswag933

6 ай бұрын

I have a opinion that may contribute to religion and afterlife. If time is infinite then also are we. It's to much coincidence to exist here in the PRESENT if we do it for the first and last time. We existed infinite times

@MuseseekerMan

6 ай бұрын

When I listen to Jordan Peterson speak, I can't understand what he's trying to say. It sounds like he's not making a point, but instead he's trying to lead us to create his narrative in our heads. He speaks like a hypnotist: "You do this..., and then you realize this...., but then you see that this and then this...., so you then this....., but then that means this....... and then this means that this...... It's the power of suggestion isn't it? Instead of a relaxing voice to make people receptive, he relies on his credentials and cites famous thinkers. He tries to appear as a vocal opponent of tyranny, but It sounds to me like he's trying to usher the have-nots of the world back into the conservative prison with his preachy slave moral themed lectures. He's not trying to promote freedom of thought or reason, he's trying to promote his conservative message.

@texasrefugee7888

6 ай бұрын

@@MuseseekerMan I think he's a nut job

Wow. This was a golden interaction ❤

Finally a reasonable, actual criticism of dr. Peterson's views. And I say this as a huge Peterson fan. People seem to love to critisize him but very rarely it is for a real, actual thing. This one I actually agree with. I would love to see them discuss again.

@Sergiuss555

6 ай бұрын

Sam Harris dismantled him like a decade ago

@Bob-of-Zoid

6 ай бұрын

If this is the first time you ever saw a "a reasonable, actual criticism of dr. Peterson's views", then you haven't been paying attention, or your views are just as bad as his.

@hypno5690

6 ай бұрын

​@@Bob-of-Zoiddork

@Bob-of-Zoid

6 ай бұрын

@@hypno5690 Is that all you got: Childish name calling? Do you have a real valid argument, preferably one with some substance? Because if not, it's abundantly clear who the dork really is, and that dork is just projecting for being butt hurt!

@It__From__Bit

6 ай бұрын

Peterson is such a bizarre dude.

Matt has the ability to clearly communicate what he is trying to say whilst Jordan has the opposite ability.

@timothyglassbrook4886

Ай бұрын

Yeah I feel like Jordan was not very clear in this conversation. Seems his thoughts went over most people's heads unfortunately

I'm not surprised they are talking about relative truth as being fuzzy with Peterson. I believe he himself believes in God as a representation of the pinnacle of the moral hierarchy, but doesn't actually believe in a sentient being capable of miracles. He has avoided answering that question on numerous occasions. He understands that the idea of God is essential for the sheep, but the thinkers are more skeptical...even if they quickly learn where and where not they can state their views.

@LeeZaslofsky

6 ай бұрын

His whole method is to avoid answering questions. His method is to get bogged down in definitions, thus using up the time and wearing down his interlocutors. Don't laugh -- he has made lots of money by doing this.

@timothyglassbrook4886

Ай бұрын

I agree and disagree. I think his notion of God is a metaphorical pinnacle of morality. He doesn't seem to believe in a Literal god, but I think part of that is simply that he doesn't know and there's no way to know. I don't see his aversion to the question as manipulative, more as irrelevant in terms of his personal beliefs, and possibly damaging to the exploration of the topic if he takes a stance one way or another

Truth is what comports with reality. But what is real? This is a materialist reductionist interpretation of what is real, reducible to what can be apprehended by the senses. JBP is becoming more expansive, and I appreciate it.

@anaximanderofapollonia9842

6 ай бұрын

Does this mean that one's faith is by default beyond one's senses, or within those?

@_Stargazer_.

6 ай бұрын

Real, is anything that can be observed using any of the 5 senses + deduced using data (effects of a phenomenon. Atleast we have good reason for conclusion there) . That is all we have to work with as human beings . So we have no other choice but to go with that view ... and anything beyond it is mere hypothesis . Until anything beyond is proven , reality is all we have. Its good to explore and guess work .. but to conclude on them, change your belief structure and change your lifestyle based off such blind conclusions is what is unproductive .. and sometimes even harmful .

@harryposner7584

6 ай бұрын

Exactly. If truth is what comports with reality and it's the individual who ultimately decides what is real (which is the state of our planet right now in the age of relativism), then there can be no agreement as to what is 'true' for all. His statement rests on a cloud of nothing. And he accuses JP of being 'blurry' and slippery...

@bernierasmusson9257

6 ай бұрын

​@@harryposner7584Reality can be observed, measured, tested, and peer reviewed.

@LeeZaslofsky

6 ай бұрын

"Expansive?" Please. And what does "comport with" mean?

Why, in the first place, has anyone ever given Jordan Peterson a public platform? When has he ever said anything profoundly pertenant to social or spiritual significance? Isn't he all about the verbiage-esc shell game? Matt. Why give Jordan the time of day? And, why is this entire podcast devoted to that? IOW, Who the hell cares "what happened to Jordan Peterson? And here I am....

@garysanders8350

3 ай бұрын

You just a hater dude

@peterboytRaKs

3 ай бұрын

@@garysanders8350 Yeah buddy! I hate stupidity. Get your freakin act together dude!

@garysanders8350

3 ай бұрын

@@peterboytRaKs you must hate yourself then...not your buddy pal

You will never convince a faith-based believer with rationality. It is pure emotion and self-identity. On the other hand all these "debaters" need each other to make a living.

@johneastwood3039

Ай бұрын

Why is it so important to you that people don't believe in God?

@sharkaspree8148

Ай бұрын

@@johneastwood3039 It is important enought to them that I do

@johneastwood3039

Ай бұрын

@@sharkaspree8148 I don't give a damn what you do or don't believe. Whatever makes you happy.

@sharkaspree8148

Ай бұрын

@@johneastwood3039 yet here you are, giving a damn, nice try but you don’t act how you say you do

@johneastwood3039

Ай бұрын

@@sharkaspree8148 I asked why it was so important to him that people don't believe in God. "Nice try but" that's hardly evidence that I give a damn what people believe.

I recently had an IQ test and found out i am well into double figures. Yay!

@shawn4888

6 ай бұрын

Like the comment, but always wondered if any iq tests even allow for single digits.

@Laneous14

6 ай бұрын

You're fit to debate with Matt!

@davidtrottier8963

6 ай бұрын

​@@shawn4888if my eyekuu wus 1 point lower i was gonna be a potatoe!! Or mayve a rockk.😊

@shawn4888

6 ай бұрын

@@davidtrottier8963 haha

@leegrant7333

6 ай бұрын

what a dope

One can't do metaphysics (i.e. what is reality) without first making assumptions about what reality is. Just not possible philosophically. This is why it gets so tricky.

@gking407

6 ай бұрын

Religious lemmings traded in reality for stories about alternate reality, i.e. delusional thinking

@beeeps

6 ай бұрын

What makes you say that?

@shostycellist

6 ай бұрын

@@beeeps Well, what I mean is, if I am going to develop a metaphysical theory, I need an epistemology (meaning, how am I to think to yield true or mostly true metaphysicsl beliefs). Yet for my epistemology to yield mostly true metaphysical beliefs it's laws must be one with or reflect the nature of reality. So to do metaphysics I have to make assumptions about the nature of reality prior to developing an epistemology or I could not be sure my epistemology will yield true beliefs.

@monkeknts

6 ай бұрын

​@@beeepsmaking anti metaphysical argument against metaphysics ends up metaphysical making a paradox

@craigsmith1443

6 ай бұрын

One cannot 'do reality' without assumptions. They're called 'first principles.' That's why reality gets so tricky.

When I decided to watch this I was concerned I was going to be faced with losing my respect for Mr. Murray as I did for Mr. Peterson. So glad Mr. Murray didn’t disappoint me.

An important difference between Bruggencate and Peters as that the former says that we suppress what we know to be true because we want to sin, and that the latter says that we do not realize what we are since we do not want to sin.

I quit smoking by just giving up smoking. I had cravings for a few weeks, but then they went away. I certainly didn't have a mystical experience. What bullshit.

@russellward4624

6 ай бұрын

What's BS about it? I quite smoking and didn't have a mystical experience either. JP is the only person in the world making this claim.

@grendlsma

6 ай бұрын

@@russellward4624 Peterson's take is BS.

@pg-xp1jy

Ай бұрын

Why did you give it up in the first place? & How is it different from when you started?

I think this quote by one of Peterson's favorite authors describes him fairly well. Maybe he has even brought it up himself at one point (if its tl;dr, the last sentence is the most important): "I want to say to you, about myself, that I am a child of this age, a child of unfaith and scepticism, and probably (indeed I know it) shall remain so to the end of my life. How dreadfully has it tormented me (and torments me even now) this longing for faith, which is all the stronger for the proofs I have against it. And yet God gives me sometimes moments of perfect peace; in such moments I love and believe that I am loved; in such moments I have formulated my creed, wherein all is clear and holy to me. This creed is extremely simple; here it is: I believe that there is nothing lovelier, deeper, more sympathetic, more rational, more manly, and more perfect than the Saviour; I say to myself with jealous love that not only is there no one else like Him, but that there could be no one. I would even say more: If anyone could prove to me that Christ is outside the truth, and if the truth really did exclude Christ, I should prefer to stay with Christ and not with truth." - Fyodor Dostoevsky

@Jack-in-the-country

6 ай бұрын

Thank you for sharing this. Absolutely beautiful, and right on the money about JP. I don't know the man, but I think he is terrified of this reality we share. It's especially clear from his views on climate change, when he conflates "climate" and "everything." It's like he believes that if we don't understand the climate then we understand nothing, and we're completely fucked. He even says this much to Rogan: that if the data is really right, we're screwed. I think his religious beliefs are similar to that: if we don't have a God narrative and God traditions to structure us and guide us, then we're totally lost. We're scared children in the middle of the woods crying for semblance, for patterns, for meaning. It's actually a really bleak view and I think it's largely based in ignorance of science. This makes sense, though, because for several decades science and technology hasn't been much of a help, having been largely usurped by the world's most powerful people to exert influence on us. I personally see a lot of hope, and I think Jordan would too if he kept up with some literature on Climate Science or Ergodicity Economics or Cybernetics. There is actually a lot of hope, and even though we are on our own out here, in this crazy universe, that is no reason to stop fighting every day for freedom and peace.

@Tusitala1967

6 ай бұрын

@@Jack-in-the-country JP studied climate science when he served for two years on a Canadian subcommittee on sustainable development for the UN Secretary General.

@jerryodonovan8624

6 ай бұрын

I think Dostoevsky perfectly sums up Peterson’s position on Christianity. Personally I would rather accept truth in my life, rather than a weak-minded fantasy.

@trishsoren3445

6 ай бұрын

I find it very disheartening that many people have to rely on an entity to feel loved. Why not trying to help others and make a positive difference in someone else's life as way to feel connected with others? Unfortunately, believing in a "higher power" has continually been ( and is currently being) proven NOT to translate to feelings of love, empathy and kindness to others. 😢

@paulbrown7872

4 ай бұрын

@@Jack-in-the-country Great comment, but he doesn't conflate "climate" and "everything". He says the "environment" is everything, which it is.

The chairs seem like they are horrifically uncomfortable.

I liked Peterson. I did not share all his believes but he used to have a lot of interesting positions. But in the mean time he is more and more sliding to the extreme right.

@monacaravetta

3 ай бұрын

I think he has discovered the money that one can make pandering to the extreme right.

@Djscott2728

3 ай бұрын

Or has the left just slide off the scale and calls anyone right of Moa "far-right"?

@Djscott2728

3 ай бұрын

​@@monacaravettaask Hasan and TYT about grifting for extremists...

@kurtglathar5162

3 ай бұрын

@@Djscott2728 Many people have slid too far left, many people have slid too far right. But Peterson is in the latter category. It's not just "the left". I'm centrist and simply noticed Peterson has become more radical in his conservative leanings.

@Djscott2728

3 ай бұрын

@@kurtglathar5162 how so?

I love both of these men..they are a pleasure to listen to

@laniefeleski7288

6 ай бұрын

I like Murray. I don't find Dillahunty that persuasive or knowledgeable, anymore. I wonder if these people ever read Genealogy of Morals or The Antichrist. They don't even seem aware of the arguments that the main values of Christianity suffuse the entire culture and are perceived and absorbed; and that atheism can have a moral system, but it looks COMPLETELY different to the operating set.

I'd love to see a debate between Matt Dillahunty and Andrew Wilson

@mickadams1905

6 ай бұрын

Lol!

When was this recorded?

Jordan Peterson said that one can't quit smoking without mystical experience? Hmmm, I had no idea that reading ''The easy way to stop smoking'' by Allen Carr is a mystical experience.

@bryanutility9609

6 ай бұрын

Maybe I should grab the audio book? 😂. I love vaping too much.

@Ryan-sl8mw

6 ай бұрын

That's because you misunderstood and mis-characterized his metaphorical meaning of mythical. Your thinking is superficial. Your low IQ has you all kinds of confused.

@flankspeed

6 ай бұрын

Can't be that effective: he had to write a sequel 😂

@matt_milack

6 ай бұрын

@@flankspeed I smoked 15-25 cigarettes a day for 10 years. I've read the book on 6th of March 2020 and I haven't had a single cigarette since then.

@hayseanward

6 ай бұрын

Drinking you dolt! It’s damn near impossible to quite drinking alcohol without spiritual intervention! Do some research

In five minutes this man, who I am listening to for the first time, is more convincing to me in challenging JP, who I love, than Sam Harris has been.

@SolarJakee

6 ай бұрын

@@arjuna190178 the ironic thing is that Dillahunty has fallen for woke ideology in the last couple years. A real shame

@tomw4918

6 ай бұрын

Sam just doesn’t come off as aggressive and I don’t think he always knows how to respond to JP’s unintelligible word salad. I also think he likes Jordan as a person so that might make it tough

@lindseyroy1629

6 ай бұрын

Douglas Murray is incredible. Matt has gone woke in recent years, and I wouldn’t recommend him.

@SolarJakee

6 ай бұрын

@@meowpurrrrr It's just an easy way to write-off what someone says without actually trying to understand it

@tzc832

6 ай бұрын

So cheers for this men cause JP definitely has to get challanged

when was the original discussion?

@redmed10

4 ай бұрын

Pangburn will never tell you. They always pretend they are fresh.

One thing Peterson does is work through topics/issues out in the open, good or bad, it’s great to watch.

@steven5054

6 ай бұрын

The hubris of the man

@LeeZaslofsky

6 ай бұрын

He doesn't "work through" anything. He bullshits by pretending he's trying to define terms. Somehow the definition never really takes shape, though.

@jabba820

6 ай бұрын

he's proven himself to be a mentally unstable grifter who has greatly dumbed-down his original persona (which seemed much more like his true self)

@thedog5k

6 ай бұрын

@@LeeZaslofsky He uses the term "god" as the " the most important thing to somebody" and says he believes in it. But he also refuses to say if he believes in Christian god and bullshits around the question.

@LeeZaslofsky

6 ай бұрын

He bullshits around most questions. He has the"courage" to stand up to transsexuals who ask to be referred to as "they" -- he's always up for an attack on a vulnerable, powerless group. But when it comes to God -- hey, you have to be careful not to offend anyone who might buy your books! But you gotta hand it to him -- he got rich and famous, which means God likes hm.

Jordan Peterson is beholden to where his cash flow comes from, which is predominantly religious conservatives.

@LeeZaslofsky

6 ай бұрын

And male college students looking for reasons to justify their assumption that they belong on top of the Hierarchy. I've heard speculation that Peterson may become a preacher some day, maybe when the revenue from his current gig runs out.

@nathanashley2693

6 ай бұрын

hes a cuck allright

@DMuchnik

6 ай бұрын

Oh you'd be surprised how much atheists love money as well (and i am saying it as an atheist myself!) People in general are greedy by nature (as a general rule), the second you understand that life makes a lot more sense :) Generalizations about a specific group of people like the one you mentioned don't solve anything, and imo and further the problem even more.

@delxinogaming6046

2 ай бұрын

Yeah. He happened upon an easy hustle, and went for it…

If you listen to Peterson BEFORE he had his severe medical problems, he's a different person NOW. He was hospitalized, near death and in a coma in 2019. He went to Russia and had some radical, heavy medical treatments there - hence his soft spot for that country. That very long nutritionally deficient period altered his brain and his thinking.

@magicponyrides

4 ай бұрын

Please go back and listen to any of Peterson's earlier original work. It was just as shallow and absurd then.

@charmerci

4 ай бұрын

@@magicponyrides - i have to admit is that I haven't read or seen much of Peterson. However, I was giving him the benefit of a doubt based on his one amazing lecture on creativity. kzread.info/dash/bejne/dmt_0JepZ7e2j7w.html

Do people outside the UK realise that Douglas Murray is the epitome of smarm and arrogance...

We evolved to be moral, and to understand ourselves and the world through stories. We have an instinct for story-and those stories helped us as hunter gatherers to survive. That’s why our earliest stories are morality tales, heroic narratives, and origin myths. The old stories are failing because they were based on magic; we need to build new stories based on reason. When a god believer says that without a belief in god we would all be murderers, they are projecting; humans naturally cooperate-it takes religion to tell you to kill over differences in belief.

@johnbrion4565

6 ай бұрын

Like temples of reason during the French Revolution? That turned out real well. Without God and objective truth there is no foundation on which to build a just society. It’s completely my will against yours. Also people take for granted how great things are in the west compared to most human history. To me this is evidence of the truth of Christ as the west was built upon Judeo Christian principles.

@colinross3755

6 ай бұрын

@@johnbrion4565bollocks - if you don’t know why and how humans can create moral standards then you are the problem. Morality from a god is still subjective ffs, objective morality doesn’t exist. God’s morality is subjective by definition.

@johnbrion4565

6 ай бұрын

@@colinross3755 how can humans create an objective moral standard? If God is real then by definition there is an objective moral standard as it would be set by God.

@colinross3755

6 ай бұрын

@@johnbrion4565 I never said humans can create an objective moral standard - read what I said. We can create moral standards from a rational consideration of the impacts and effects on people and society arising from behaviours which is underpinned by objective reasoning of those impacts and effects. The more we understand psychologically, sociologically, physiologically for example the better we can refine those standards to better reflect outcomes for people. At the heart of it we place human wellbeing. No one is suggesting we get it right first time but secular morality has already surpassed biblical morality. How come you or I can make the bible morality better in 2 minutes. I’ve thought of one revision that would have improved the lives of so many for a long time - if you haven’t that says more about you than me. ‘If god is real’ - there it is in a nutshell. Objective morality is without influence of personal feelings or opinions. Subjective is with influence of personal feelings or opinions. Gods morality is his personal take ie his feelings and opinions which makes it, by definition, subjective. You don’t get to change the accepted meanings of words to suit your argument, that’s called special pleading which is a fallacy.

@johnbrion4565

6 ай бұрын

@@colinross3755 ok so you admit you nor any other human can create an objective moral standard and therein lies the problem. It is just your view of what is right and fair and best for all and Hitler and Stalin, etc. had a view much different from yours. I challenge you to offer up a better moral system than what Christ preached. I’ve thought and reflected much on Christ and to me his system does seem to be objectively true, timeless and universal and oh what and amazing gift God has given us if only you can begin to see. It seems you have a hard time conceptualizing God. God is not a competitive being inside the universe. God is the very act of being itself. Who imparts existence and sustains all creation.

Not sure if Matt picked up on it, but it seemed like Douglas was explaining that the reason Jordan is afraid to admit that he doesn't literally believe (only metaphorically), is because the fear of admitting as much is akin to why people like them fear admitting the I.Q. stats. Because a) they're hurtful and b) they don't turn out to be indicative of worth on all the measures that matter. So if Peterson admitted it wasn't literally true then it's offensive to those who believe it is, and it turns out that believing it or not isn't what makes us intrinsically valuable anyways. However, I'm not sure that's why Jordan is reluctant to answer that question. I think that was just Douglas being charitable to Jordan by trying to defend him in a way that Matt would accept. Very clever of Douglas by the way. Listening to Jordan over the years since this event, I think it's become clear the reason Jordan wrestles with the question is because he's genuinely not sure of the answer yet. Whereas Matt has had the benefit of true belief only to realise it wasn't real. Jordan hasn't had the salvation experience yet so he's still susceptible to the doubt.

@S78332

6 ай бұрын

Jordan is smart enough and aware enough to acknowledge that he may very well be wrong in spite of his inclinations.

@---Dana----

6 ай бұрын

He knows his fans believe in God and he doesn't want to alienate them. Bad for business.

@dfjpr

6 ай бұрын

I think it actually hurts Jordan too much to be able to even say it. I think he goes into turmoil at the suggestion that it might not be true, and tries desperately to clutch for any straw he can find to hold up the bridge.

@LeeZaslofsky

6 ай бұрын

Peterson doesn't "wrestle with" questions. He bullshits about them. Much of his public is "religious", so he panders to them by pretending he's "wrestling". Another part of his public is anti religious,so he panders to them by not QUITE saying he believes in God. No one is "genuinely sure" whether God does or does not exist. That is what faith is all about: "believing" without being able to prove something. People of faith will often say they "know" there is a God, but they can never show proof. Peterson of course knows this, but he feels he has to play on both teams, so he "wrestles". Meanwhile, he is making money hand over fist.

@medarby3066

6 ай бұрын

​@@---Dana----just like IQ is bad for business.

Mr. Peterson is living proof that intellectual powers never fully compensate for emotional pathologies.

@DharmaBeing

4 ай бұрын

I was planning to make a comment, but yours covered it entirely.

@foxmulder6695

4 ай бұрын

What do you mean?

@MarcosElMalo2

4 ай бұрын

@@foxmulder6695 Your intelligence doesn’t change how screwed up you are.

@inoderlulzer5163

2 ай бұрын

What's pathological about believing in the concept of good and evil? I feel like denouncing a good Christian believer is more pathological than anything they're doing.

@ronrice1931

2 ай бұрын

@@inoderlulzer5163 Good vs eeevil. Yes, nothing psychotic about that.

Murray addressed the IQ subject as an example to say, don't pile on to the debate of whether of not God exists. Instead, look towards preserving the individual rather than confusing it. I'm sorry Matt, but that went right over your head.

We are actually too close to the collapse of Christendom in popular culture to properly understand the affects of a foundationally atheistic culture. One could argue even Communist China, now a few generations into their social experiment, has yet to successfully purge religion altogether from the cultural and moral attitudes of its populace. For an American born before the 1990's to say he's an atheist, only means he doesn't believe in God. It doesn't mean he is free from cultural attitudes that are informed by Judeo-Christian values. There is no clear dividing line between what you believe is true philosophically (eg. "There is no God") & how you morally act based on the way you were raised raised & the influences you absorbed from a fundamentally religious culture. I believe Jordan Peterson associates the profound relativism that our culture is currently going through as a sort of pre-cursor to the chaos of a culture truly based upon atheism. If there is NO God, there is no design proper to humanity (that's especially true with technological advancement), which means there is no particular behavior that is right or wrong for humans to fit that design--there is no "real" good, evil, right or wrong behavior, there is just what you can successfully do or not do within the confines of the society in which you live. That seems fundamentally sound. I would say Peterson can't imagine a situation in which a culture fundamentally influenced by the idea there is no design, purpose, or meaning to humanity other than what we make up individually for ourselves or collectively is one that will survive. I agree.

@vanguard9067

6 ай бұрын

Yep, that’s what atheist means - seeing no evidence there is a god. The rest of your comment expands beyond/outside of that.

@user-sw9bo1hv9z

6 ай бұрын

I would argue, from Peterson's normal line of logic--Judeo-Christian theism brought about the greatest culture for world-wide human flourishing...which should at least be considered a possible piece of "evidence" theism may be correct. Conversely, if Atheism, as a foundation for culture, leads to the dissolution of that same culture, it should be taken into account as an argument against secular-atheism being true enough to human experience to move humanity forward. Also from Peterson's normal line of logic, atheists often want to have their cake and eat it too, defending they are "definitely atheists", but the values they want to inculcate in their ideal secular society seem based on the cultural template of the Judeo-Christian worldview they grew up with in western culture. For example, there is no intrinsic reason from an atheistic perspective to inculcate values such as inclusion, diversity, or care for the least of humanity (especially across tribal lines) if there is no intrinsic value to human life in the mode that the Judeo-Christian ethic suggests. In Atheism, tribalism and barbarity would seem to be the default moral position because it would presumably bring about the greatest competition and adaptation within human evolution. But that's the opposite of what most atheists want. This is an inconsistency.@@vanguard9067

@vanguard9067

6 ай бұрын

@@user-sw9bo1hv9z I appreciate the summary. I wonder what atheists coming from let’s say a Hindu, or Shinto, or animist upbringing hold as core values. I have some thinking and research to do. Thank you.

@user-sw9bo1hv9z

6 ай бұрын

I'm not sure what analogies there would be to the Judeo-Christian ethic in Shinto or Animist religions, although some aspects of Hinduism would be compatible. None of those faiths informed the Western culture as such. My commentary was specific to Peterson's dialogue with this one atheist, and atheists like him who grew up in Western culture and consequently assume those values into their vision of a purely secular world. @@vanguard9067

The singular loud laugh after "thats what got on your tits" 😂 was this filmed in the US because in England its sooo common 🤣

It’s true he get a lot of things wrong and sometimes he speak without knowing, but I still respect him because thanks to him I was able to heal from several diseases through carnivorous diet . If he hadn’t been there, I believe I would never have discovered it; I was quite severely disabled and now my life has completely changed. I have absolutely no idea how it works, but it works. It was a revelation and I will always thank Jordan for that. The rest doesn’t matter to me.

Jungian Archetypes are essentially as useful today as Dianetics.

Peterson is a wind bag of epic proportions. The man always uses 10 sentences when only 2 are needed.

@LoanShoppingExpert

6 ай бұрын

I've always thought this, too!

@jameskingston6175

6 ай бұрын

Plenty of problems either of them with no solutions, same old mental gymnastics.@@LoanShoppingExpert

@betsywoolbright8059

6 ай бұрын

How is that a bad thing?

@virginiagrundman4012

6 ай бұрын

@@betsywoolbright8059 verbosity turns listeners off

@FatalAlcatraz

6 ай бұрын

​@@betsywoolbright8059 ineffective rhetoric skills

I firmly agree with a lot of what Jordan says about free speech, and he's a brilliant psychologist. But whenever he wanders religion he often just bungles it completely. Matt mentions two examples: the ridiculous dance around what "truth" means, and suggesting that everyone is religious by default. In both, Jordan is being an overly obnoxious contrarian just for the hell of it, twisting language into word salad just to make some absurd point that is really just playing with definitions. I've applauded him when he's exposed agenda driven ideologues with his trademark phrase "well, what do you mean by X, exactly". But then, when he's in a serious discussion with an intellectually honest individual like Matt, he uses the same phrase to intentionally muddy the waters with questions like "well, what do you mean by truth", which immediately makes the conversation degrade into solipsistic drivel. We all know damn well what we mean when we use the word "truth", and so does Jordan. And unlike what Jordan seems to suggest, it can be very precisely defined, as Matt elegantly did at 0:50. Sam Harris tried to get over the same hurdle, but got nowhere because Jordan kept intentionally conflating truth with opinion, allowing him to basically make any point he wanted and then defend it as metaphorical. It's hard to have a sensible conversation like that. Another example that comes to mind is when he said something along the lines of "well, what 'God' really means is just whatever is at the top of your hierarchy of values". Give me a break. It's extremely hypocritical to demand "preciseness" from people, only to indulge in obscene vagueness yourself when it suits you. God is a super loaded word, he knows it, and chooses to intentionally misuse it anyway to make his point. That's dishonest. But to me, the worst are some of his videos in the last year or so, where he does weird prophetic monologues of doom as he stares straight into a camera. Those are so cringey they're unwatchable. It's crazy how honest and brilliant individuals like Jordan can become completely incoherent and hypocritical the second they defend religion. Hitchens was right - religion truly does poison everything.

@sfappetrupavelandrei

6 ай бұрын

I agree that the recent activity of Dr. Jordan Peterson does more harm to his personality than good. And I believe that he should have quitted the public scene a while ago. I also agree with you that sometimes he is hypocritical with some of his clarifying questions while he can also be very vague in how he expresses himself. However I disagree with your view about asking what does "truth" really means. I find superficial to think that everyone sees the "truth" the same. Yes, at a superficial level we can make this claim but if we go deeper, we discover so much more complex and diverse views about the truth.

@chrism3790

6 ай бұрын

@@sfappetrupavelandrei "Complex and diverse views about the truth" is a longer way of saying "opinions". Those are not the same thing. Everyone can interpret the world differently and form opinions, but there is still only one truth, because there is only one reality. There isn't any nuance to that.

@eniooliveira9196

6 ай бұрын

I suppose the idea behind those monologues is that since video reaches a wider audience than print, Peterson hoped to broaden his reach while still having the benefit of the careful wording that goes into writing. The problem is that it comes off as smug and inauthentic, unlike his conversations elsewhere which flow naturally. Then you look at the comment section and it's a fucking echo chamber where everyone only praises that presentation style. Maybe he's been too trigger-happy at blocking comments he doesn't like.

@sfappetrupavelandrei

6 ай бұрын

@@chrism3790 In this case my reply will be: yes and His name is Jesus Christ. 😅😅😅

I'm a non-believer myself, but I listened to JP do a talk once and I agreed with him on one point. That is if a society doesn't have a religion, they will find one. He gives communism as an example. When I first heard this I didn't buy it, but I can see this unfolding in an "atheist" group I belong to on FB. Unlike myself, most of these atheists grew up in a religious family and then as adults decided it was bs. I notice most of them are radical leftists. They are committed to the woke ideology as though it's a religion. They believe things without evidence. When shown evidence of what they believe isn't true, they tell me where to go and they maintain their belief. I realize Jordan was right - most people will adopt something else that is not good for society (much less so than Christianity anyway). I think it doesn't apply to me because I didn't grow up with these beliefs, and I don't find the need to fill the "missing space" after abandoning a religion. Authoritarian dictators get rid of religion because they want loyalty to the party. It's easier to brainwash people who don't have a religion as well.

@possumface2425

6 ай бұрын

"Woke ideology ". Can you give us a definition?

@delavan9141

6 ай бұрын

Very true, most people, excepting the most independent thinkers, will find some belief system outside themselves and/or group to guide their thinking and actions. Scientists (I was married into a science family) like to scoff at religious believers, but they put their faith into science, which is a human construct and just as prone to rigid and selfish thinking as any other faith.

@jonstone9741

6 ай бұрын

You referred to atheists who believe things without evidence and maintain their belief when shown evidence that their belief is not true. Can you please give us some examples or at least one example? I'm an atheist, but there is nothing religious about my belief. I simply can't believe in a god unless there is verifiable evidence to prove the existence of a god. It's that simple.

@faneres4841

6 ай бұрын

ex-atheist leftists exist because we were taught by our parents how to be a good person, and then left because we saw that the church does not treat people like that. its that simple. we dont treat "wokeness" as a religion. we were taught to be nice to people, and we found out through research and study that being nice to people means being inclusive. it is demonstrably not eaier to brainwash people that dont have a religion. believing things without evidence trains your mind to believe things without evidence. this is why religion has been used countless times as a tool to leverage hate and push a war

@PMSAvenger1

6 ай бұрын

@@possumface2425 So, people that describe themselves as "woke" are usually liberal/democrats who think of themselves as a bit of a social justice warrior. The term "woke" means they view them selves as being awake to the suffering of others in the world. Their beliefs are often radical and not necessarily based on the reality of a situation. I'll give you just one example. They say women don't get the same opportunities as men when the stats show that more women attend university than men. They used to have abortion rights but they started requesting later-term abortions and that's when the scrutiny started and they actually lost some rights. They play "identity politics" meaning they see most people as belonging to some sort of identity group, white straight male, gay, trans, woman, black, asian ...... whatever. They often "virtue signal". What I mean by virtue signal is they often say how much they care about the welfare of others, and they vote for high immigration, or they believe illegals should be welcome. Yet, they do very little in the way of actually helping others. They just like to announce their virtue. Illegal immigration hurts others, but if the others don't fit into one of their "oppressed groups", they don't care. This is how I view woke people. Woke people themselves see themselves as an activist for those less fortunate. What they don't understand is that viewing others as less fortunate based on their skin colour is racism in itself. They don't know true racism when they see it or true misogyny. They just like making the accusation.

The way I see it, Peterson's problem is that he surged into the spotlight by berating 15-year-old boys for not cleaning their rooms enough, so when he tried to transition into talking to adults he was not equipped.

To understand Peterson you need to understand Jung's complicated relationship with religion as a symbolic representation of our own existence and the truth of the universe, and his ideas of God. Peterson is follows Jung like a Christian follows the Bible.

@raxino774

6 ай бұрын

Peterson still doesn't have a yes/no answer on God's existence

@StudentDad-mc3pu

6 ай бұрын

@@raxino774 He is a narcissist and the last thing he wants is to upset the Christian Right who give him so much approval.

Im kinda shocked but also glad that Matts circle allowed him to even speak with Douglas. Ok so an hour after I made this comment I looked into how the ACA was doing lately and now it all makes sense. I was curious about this after his debate with Destiny but seeing as how deranged the ACA has become Im glad Matt is doing his own thing.

@sf6199

6 ай бұрын

That's because all woke liberals secretly LOVE n@zis

@ztarzcream

6 ай бұрын

This was 5 years ago. I think his circle had a meltdown and fell apart later. Now he's in another circle.

@lawsonharrison6927

6 ай бұрын

@ztarzcream yeah true. I watched his video on when he left or rather was exiled a year or so back and gave my two cents in the comments.

@Laneous14

6 ай бұрын

@@ztarzcream So you're saying that Matt aligned himself with bad people, said that they were correct, then when his den of snakes bit him he grifted on elsewhere? Gotcha. Better listen to this guy!

@lawsonharrison6927

6 ай бұрын

@@Laneous14 I wouldnt call them "bad people", I dont know what exactly it was that he said that caused them to "bite back" and I never said we should listen to him or not.

"sometimes, among very conservative people, they come to very rigid feelings about things because they intuit where they might go unleashed" One of the scariest things my Catholic dad said to me, among a plethora of terrifying things, was that without his faith there'd be nothing to stop him murdering the people he hated. That was probably the tipping point of me losing my faith around 12 or 13 years old. Other things were seeing my cousins screaming and crying at their dad for not going to church because "don't you want to be in heaven with us", with their awful mum egging this on. And when one of my cousins was saying that gays go to hell I told him that Elton John, one of his favourite singers, was gay at which point he began crying and then later claimed that he hated Elton John's music - I also got the lecture of a lifetime from my aunt for that one.

@argondrolf785

6 ай бұрын

I feel like the NEED for religion to keep you on a moral path is a horrible, yet all too common way of approaching it. That being said, i feel ethics has set a terribly low bar for what is considered acceptable, and the amount of people who have been killed in the past two centuries through war, revolution and unbound experimentation shows that some people do need that “fear” of God more than others.

@joeyadair9228

6 ай бұрын

Rhetorical question: like most atheists I have talked to, the reason you are an atheist is because of your experiences with theists? That would be like me saying I don't believe in science because I've met some really mean scientists. Our experiences with people unfortunately influence our ability to make rational decisions.

@Dillon1099

6 ай бұрын

@@joeyadair9228 While I agree with this, based on the fact I had some really bad experiences with doctors when I was a child, and now I know some amazing doctors and medical staff in general, I do feel compelled to point out that this is a lot like telling a refugee "not all soldiers are bad". At the end of the day you being right about the facts doesn't make the dismissal of someone's trauma an effective argument. Even though that isn't your intent, it is how it comes across, and it does you no favors. Took me a long time to figure that out. You can pour your pure water into someone else's cup, but if their cup is full of boiling mud than you've only made a terrible mess.

@johnandersson8258

6 ай бұрын

@@joeyadair9228 Yes, but in a qualified way. As you grow older, get more educated and experienced their way of relating to religion makes you realise how inconsistent and, quite frankly, childish their beliefs are. To me it was pretty much the same experience as realizing Santa Claus wasn't real, just a couple of years later.

@Masowe.

6 ай бұрын

are you pro-life on abortion and why?

Just waiting to hear him on EWTN catholics come home tellling about his conversion to catholicism.

Jordan Peterson values religion because he values hierarchy and structure. There are other reasons, but these are the main ones. He genuinely believes that without religion things would be chaos, even if the religion in question is demonstrably untrue. He fails to see that hierarchy can and would arise in societies with an absence of religion as well, or maybe he does know, but he finds that the hierarchies created by religion more useful or preferred than those that could come out of a secular society.

@satanhunter6092

6 ай бұрын

I'm sure you've noticed the decline in the numbers of people who are strong in the faith of Christianity in America over the last 5 decades. Yet, your comment indicates that you've failed to notice the increase in crime rates in this nation over the same time frame. Your own statistics that you'll research and use to prove ME wrong will prove your comment to be incorrect. 🤗

@kaneanthony7724

6 ай бұрын

Religion is an effective antidote to Marxism. In my opinion.

@y0g_s0th0th

6 ай бұрын

@@satanhunter6092 Even over the last 5 decades crime is decreasing. It's odd to me that you would state something so easily disproven. It spiked during COVID-19, and now it's back down to pre COVID levels. The only crimes that are on the rise are property crimes, which generally are tied to poverty. But crime has been declining for decades now. It may ebb and flow, but the overall trend is a less violent society. I can't help that you bought into the fear mongering.

@midgetworld228

6 ай бұрын

He doesn't value hierarchies he just states they exist and you can't get rid of them so an attempt to do so is misguided. Sure you value them like you value oxygen, it's a redundant thing to say so arguing about it is mind dumbingly boring, unless you don't care about facts.

@y0g_s0th0th

6 ай бұрын

@@midgetworld228 He doesn't just state they exists, he values them. He thinks they are necessary and important. Also you clearly didn't read my comment because at no point did I claim or allude to hierarchy being a bad thing either. I said he believes the hierarchy born out of religious belief (even if the beliefs are untrue) is more significant than those that could be born from a secular (more specifically, an evidence-based) society. I see nothing wrong with seeing the utility in hierarchy. It's an inevitability. The issue is, the hierarchy created out of religion is based on superstition, false presumptions, and often tribalism, which inspires in/out groups. Also the term is "mind-numbingly.'

OMG, not everyone is religious! I get so sick of this. Jordan believes most people who are saying they don’t believe in God do not ACT as if they do. How hard is this to understand??

@LeeZaslofsky

6 ай бұрын

I am an atheist. Do I act as if I am a believer? Not the last time I looked.

@paulywauly6063

6 ай бұрын

@@LeeZaslofsky perhaps you do ????

@timothyglassbrook4886

Ай бұрын

​@@LeeZaslofskydo you have a moral code you ascribe to? Because that's belief. Whether or not you slap a god onto it or a dogma behind it, morality is religious by nature. That's more the point he makes

@timothyglassbrook4886

Ай бұрын

Reading comments that bash Peterson I'm generally led to believe that none of them understand what he's saying.

@LeeZaslofsky

Ай бұрын

@@timothyglassbrook4886 Don't play that trick, please. I have beliefs about lots of things. I believe that the sun rises in the east; I believe that 2 + 2= 4, I believe that some day I will die, etc etc. I could "slap a god" onto those beliefs, but it would be pointless to do so. I base my morality on reason and logic as well as compassion and honesty (among other things). None of this has anything to do with the god, though my moral views, like others I hold, may have a history of being associated with god worship. Religious people like to pretend that everything is "really" religious and atheism is itself a religion and so everybody is really religious after all. That is nonsense, though it seems to reassure some religious people to believe it, as they believe lots of other nonsense because it is reassuring to them. It's a pathetic little trick, like so much of religion.

I did ministry for a few yrs. My personal loss would be the hope an a personal guide line. What I've noticed I a few others the loss would be control and a sense of superiority.

I watched a debate recently between Alex O’Conner and Ben Shapiro about religion, and the only thing I learned was that there is no point in debating against someone who has a completely different foundation in the way they look at and process information. If you can’t even agree on what concepts like “real” are, than it’s just going to be two people having two different conversations at each other. Also if your not afforded the courtesy of assuming that the things you are saying are things you believe, than there is no debate.

"Everybody worships something. the only choice we get is what to worship." - David Foster Wallace

@paulsmart4672

4 ай бұрын

For a sufficiently broad definition of worship. And Everyone.

@Epiousios18

4 ай бұрын

@@paulsmart4672 Not really, it doesn’t need to be very “broad” at all. Some people just have a hard time accepting it is true (or don’t want it to be).

When Jordan Peterson says everyone is religious (even atheists), I think he is saying that all decent people act on a set of principles that we hold true based on our faith in those principles. Anyone who behaves according to a moral code of conduct, accepts that morality on faith. One can logically deduce why a moral code is good, but it is an act of faith that we should be good in the first place.

@shawn4888

6 ай бұрын

That's not what he said, but nice try.

@brianharper1611

6 ай бұрын

Not if you don't care about the should. I act "good" because I desire to (it feels nice) and will enforce that on others because I desire for others to act good because it benefits me. I say "you should act good if you desire a specific outcome" but if you don't care about the outcome I care about then do whatever you want. The people on my side are just going to try and stop you because you are getting in the way of our desired outcome.

@anomietoponymie2140

5 ай бұрын

A set of principles one holds true on faith are called "axioms" and the truths there are called "axiomatic truths." For instance, the idea that all people are equal, or equal in dignity and value, etc.

My theory is…Dr. Peterson is smart enough to come up with a way to make it seem like he believes it’s “true”. All because since he cares so much about his listeners and helping young people, that he knows he will lose a lot of them the minute they hear him say god is not real. It’s for the greater good in his eyes

Douglas Murray is without doubt the natural successor to Christopher Hitchens .

@50-50_Grind

6 ай бұрын

There's far too much hate inside Murray.

@endpc5166

4 ай бұрын

JP is a brilliant clinical psychologist but I wish he had the courage of Murray or Sam Harris in strongly criticizing Islam. He's a cowardly disappointment in that regard.

The whole "everyone is religious" thing seems to boil down to the fact that JP has broadened the definition of being religious to such an extent that it has become basically synonymous with being an organism that acts in the world. I'm not aware of any species in the world that acts in a purely random way, and I wouldn't expect to, as that doesn't strike me as a very good survival strategy. One can always look at any given species and observe that they have "goals" and act in a more or less consistent and structured way, and then infer some hierarchy of values. But he seems to take the extra step of conjecturing that there is necessarily a definite value at the top of the hierarchy, and not only that, but this highest value remains fixed (hence why the word "God" refers to one thing, and thus he never says "his God" or "my God", but simply "God"). This may be a fair mental model for understanding the behavior of organisms in certain cases, but it's not clear to me that it's any more than that: a mental model. He seems to think it goes much deeper than that.

@LeeZaslofsky

6 ай бұрын

Shh! You have discovered Peterson's little trick. He talks about definition all the time to avoid talking about what is being defined, because he doesn't know very much about anything.

@cheriea7764

6 ай бұрын

​@@LeeZaslofskyexactly 💯

@rachmann516

6 ай бұрын

@@LeeZaslofsky - Well, JBP knows a great deal about his own field of study, the proof is there for anyone to see. Beyond that we wouldn't want him to speak on what he doesn't know.

@carlpanzram7081

6 ай бұрын

You have got it exactly right. In my opinion, Peterson has strayed way too far into spheres and platforms that aren't his field of expertise, which too much confidence. Now he is a public person with a large following, and he isn't exactly the type of person to accept that he is wrong, he is not really a debater but more a lecturer, and he isn't an authority or very educated on most of the topics he speaks about. Even in psychology he seems to have some very "out there" views and opinions. This leads to him spreading a lot of nonsense to his followers, with a very confident tone, and his usual semi-academic ductus. He has basically cultivated a following, a person cult. I can't respect that.

@cristiewentz8586

6 ай бұрын

Can you study basic sociology and not come to the conclusion that all people groups are religious...? That's a basic in every one I have ever read a study about. Or is it only modern, 1st world mankind who don't...? Except we do, don't we. Theres something each person follows the tenets of, often to the exclusion of reason or rationality. In the absence of an organized religion,might it not be referred to as an obsession, or personal drive, or "addiction" for an action or experience...?

Mystical experience can be anything from a deep thought that is new to something someone said in a different way just to egg on your thinking. In turn you feel a need to change and be better on your own.😊

@marcdaniels9079

6 ай бұрын

No. MYSTICAL adjective 1. relating to mystics or religious mysticism. "the mystical experience" Semelhantes: spiritual religious transcendental transcendent paranormal otherworldly supernatural preternatural nonrational occult metaphysical ineffable 2. inspiring a sense of spiritual mystery, awe, and fascination. "the mystical forces of nature"

@patriciablue2739

6 ай бұрын

Or…it can be mystical

@aurorastarkey5137

6 ай бұрын

@@marcdaniels9079 yup, so we agree. What I said lands under spiritual, someone’s words can provoke concern with or affect for/of the soul/spirit It also falls under metaphysical - pertaining to the natural of metaphysics - which is the psychological study of being and knowing. Thank you for proving my point. Granted I could have worded it better.

You can take the boy out of Grande Prairie...but you can't take the Grande Prairie out of the boy.

4:18 Never realized that Murray can, at moments, have the same intonations as William F. Buckley.

Having watched the original discussion between Peterson and Dilahunty, it’s clear that Peterson was not up for this debate as structured. One of his larger problems in such discussions is precisely that he’s talking about nebulous and uncertain things as modulators of what is known. This by default puts you in a position of not providing answers, but rather asking the answerer to ask more questions. Additionally, Peterson‘s background as a clinical psychologist and as an academic support a more open ended questioning process with potential but still uncertain conclusions. This style, when confronted with a public intellectual, who deals exclusively in certainty, is going to make you appear less knowledgeable and capable by default. This does not mean however, that the certain position has the certitude it claims…and people who see Peterson as anti-intellectual have mostly not been exposed to academic scholarship, where no matter your claims or the strength of your evidence the proper attitude is curiosity tempered with doubt.

@regpharvey

6 ай бұрын

Very well said. My impression from the first debate, along with reading the many reflexively dismissive remarks about Dr. Peterson in the comments section, was that the format wasn't suited to Peterson really getting his points across. He's really a clinical psychologist, as you point out, but also a lecturer who can take hours at a time to build his case. Dillahunty is used to debates where succinct arguments are the norm, and seemed impatient with Peterson throughout most of the discussion.

@1d3m1g0d

6 ай бұрын

Thank you. Your last sentence made me think of the differences between reading a philosophical treatise and a book of aphorisms. They each have their place but there is a vast difference between the profound and the pithy and I think that's both what's on display and what many are not seeing. @@regpharvey

@lucasgervais4538

6 ай бұрын

Well said, both of you.

@DairyNZ

6 ай бұрын

I agree 👍 unfortunately it's unlikely we will ever see those two have a serious debate , for just those reasons.

@carlpanzram7081

6 ай бұрын

​@@DairyNZI Honestly don't believe Peterson has the desire to have such a debate. I like a lot of his lectures, but he is not exactly the kind of person to give up a point when faced with a good argument. Instead he would start attack your definitions relentlessly, and start the word salad engine.

I think Peterson has a different definition of god. For him a god seems to be anything that we put on the pedestal as our highest moral ideals.

@phetmoz

6 ай бұрын

That's effectively God for a person. It effectively becomes God. God is whatever drives you and motivates you (false God). People who find that nothing has value, meaning or worth becomes hyper depressed, because there is no thing out there that can serve the function of God for them. They've tried to find it, tried to get more of something but alas, nothing he's nowhere to be seen. Of course, they are right, God isn't out there as one thing among many things but is rather the source of everything.

@azzy9358

6 ай бұрын

@@phetmoz I have morals etc., but I would not call them god. So his definition is essentially something many would disagree with, it is therefore harder to debate him on god, if he sticks to his definition.

@alexandremuise8889

6 ай бұрын

@@azzy9358 that's why he doesn't answer the question "do you believe in God?" if it's just asked in a vacuum without any context. He's well aware that there are many meanings for the word "god", just like there's many different meanings for the word "believe"... believe can mean something that makes you act a certain way, or it can mean having certainty that something exists, or it can mean having confidence in someone's abilities (I believe in you)

@azzy9358

6 ай бұрын

@@alexandremuise8889 I understand the need for detailed explanation of how you mean what you say. But I think Dillahunty is right that he seems to be dodging certain questions with overly complicated answers. He can simply check what the other side is asking and answer more directly, with detailed explanation afterwards.