2015 Personality Lecture 21: Performance Prediction
Vložit
- čas přidán 30. 03. 2015
- University of Toronto PSY230
Course Information: jordanbpeterson.com/Psy230H
Playlist: • Playlist
March 31, 2015
-- SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL --
Direct Support: www.jordanbpeterson.com/donate
Merchandise: teespring.com/stores/jordanbp...
-- BOOKS --
12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos: jordanbpeterson.com/12-rules-...
Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief: jordanbpeterson.com/maps-of-m...
-- LINKS --
Website: jordanbpeterson.com/
12 Rules for Life Tour: jordanbpeterson.com/events/
Blog: jordanbpeterson.com/blog/
Podcast: jordanbpeterson.com/podcast/
Reading List: jordanbpeterson.com/great-books/
Twitter: / jordanbpeterson
Instagram: / jordan.b.peterson
Facebook: / drjordanpeterson
-- PRODUCTS --
Personality Course: www.jordanbpeterson.com/perso...
Self Authoring Suite: selfauthoring.com/
Understand Myself personality test: understandmyself.com/
Merchandise: teespring.com/stores/jordanbp...
I am so appreciative Dr Peterson gets these recorded lectures available here for everyone.
Prof.*
@@umm1384 9 up 7p l kkjejejjfjejkjejhek
18:30 for anyone that clicked off from the video about the Pattern of Alcohol Abuse.
yeah i hope i can quit alcohol but what else would i do without alcohol... A giant hole appears in my life.
Does he ever get to the point?
+Matt Olson lol yeah he does but the point was only "why couldn't we test women for alcoholism" answer at 30:22 anticlimactic point but probably only because of the presupposition that the point was going to be some profound statement about the "pattern of alcohol abuse" and perhaps how to overcome it.
I frickin' love you.
You're the bestest!
Thank you!
"I stopped doing that research partly because it became impossible."
That has to be one of my new favorite JP quotes
Grew up with a alcoholic father....learned a lot from you about this...Brilliant Dr. Brilliant.
Now I'm questioning my views on the whole 1% vs. the 99% debate here in the U.S. I was drinking the kool-aid with everyone else thinking it was so unfair for lower class people that all the wealth was being accumulated by a select few. After listening to these lectures on intelligence and conscientiousness I don't know what to think anymore. What does this mean ethically? Should we do nothing about income inequality because it's only natural that things are the way they are? I swear to God I'm going to have some sort of existential crisis after listening to all these lectures.
ladynottingham89 research the federal reserve and fractional reserve banking, and zoinism then you will understand how and why there is poverty, war and income inequality. I suggest sourcing this sort of information from independent, non-corporate or government related journalists such as the Corbett Report, Ryan Dawson at ANC report, and even check out Ron Paul's Liberty Report here on CZcams.
Check out Alan Watts and Terrence McKenna while you're at it; this is very intense, life changing material albeit.
Best of luck. I'm figuring it out too.
ladynottingham89 Our best hope for the future is for America to wake up and stop allowing the government to take 60% of the citizens' taxes to build bombs and F-35s to destabilize the middle east, creating terrorists and refugees. We provide billions in aid to the Syrian and Israeli governments, whom in turn use the money to supply militias (like isis al-quieda) that our American army continues to drone, subsequently killing hundreds of innocent civilians like the 200 we droned in the Mosul hospital last week. Waking up is scary, but our only hope to spread the truth.
Make no mistake, however, you're getting absolutely fucked if you're working and making less than $200 an hour. The our dollar is basically monopoly money and is inflating (loosing value) by the day. (see fractional reserve banking)
Nature is unfair and all just societies are based on strong social hierarchy. If I were you, I'd start reading the writings of the Wise Greek - they basically had the right fundamental assumptions and provide good guiding principles to the questions you asked. Align your life in accordance with Logos, habituate Virtue, and you will find Eudaimonia. Also remember: Anechou kai Apechou!
I understand what you mean, and I share this concern. I guess that the right way to go would be securing a floor so that the poorest stratum of society still has access to basic human needs. Proper food, proper education, proper healthcare. I mean is not that everyone needs to work in modern society to keep it going. Work should not be an obligation, but a commodity for those who wish to excel and secure a privileged position in the hierarchy (this was argued by Marx actually, he basically said "hey, why is consumption better than leisure?" more or less). This could be accomplished, I believe, if the richest 1% went from being astronomically rich to just filthy rich and allowed wealth to be distributed a bit more equally (and I stress this: not equally, only a bit more equally). How much more? well, enough so that nobody experiences poverty and lives with dignity.
The problem would be in finding something for those people to do, which is a big one. Bored people are very dangerous people. Drugs and crime are more likely to be caused by purposelessness than need (because let's face it, nobody dies of starvation in modern cities).
Orwell described it beautifully in 1984. How nations fritter away their wealth (from the ancient Egyptians with their pyramids to modern nations with war machinery) so that they can prevent the distribution of wealth, what would empower (and awaken) the poorest strata of society. It's a dangerous balance, and I think we are slowly getting there. As long as we keep the ideal point of balance as our target humanity will keep evolving forward.
That equation is called Euler's Identity, which is just a special case of when π is substituted into Euler's formula, a convenient mathematical definition used for describing the complex number plane. Euler's formula: e^(iθ) = cosθ + i·sinθ, where e^(iθ) is a complex number sitting on the unit circle centered at the origin of the complex plane, cosθ is the real component of the complex number, and sinθ is its imaginary component. Now if π is substituted for θ into the equation, we see that, e^(i·π) = cosπ + i·sinπ = e^(i·π) = -1 + i·0 = e^(i·π) = -1 + 0. Rearranging we obtain the identity in question: e^(i·π) + 1 = 0
@Iris Mateev yeah, that's right.
Thanks, I scrolled down looking for this
@Iris Mateev Yes you're right. I fixed it. The actual identity is ofc e^(iπ) + 1 = 0, not -1 as I originally put down by mistake
I laughed really hard at the "apart from the fact that they're women." I love being married
Fascinating what he is saying about relevant variables... Honestly this idea could expand to SEVERAL other areas of scientific research. Grateful for this broader perspective...
31:20
“There are an infinite number of things that make people different…random assignation.”
Regarding intelligence and eminence,
I haven’t seen any studies, but I would think it would come down to the following factors:
1.) Social Status
2.) Social PRESSURE
3.) Time and Experience
4.) Variation of Experience
5.) Variation of Acquaintances:
Age, Gender, Social Statuses, Culture, Ideologies
6.) Personality and History:
Controlling, Abandonment, Secludedness, Introverted and/or Extroverted, Competitive, Less Emotional, Emotional Stability, Curious, Intellectually Honest
7.) Life Adversity
8.) Mistakes and Responsibility Taken
9.) Opportunity
10.) Quantity of Quality “Mentors”
18:30 Man that joke bombed like a plane over pearl harbor.
In relation to economists not knowing of distributions, that's just normal. A professor by the name of Steve Keen wrote a book(Debunking Economics), rubbishing (most of) the discipline for essentially getting attached to equilibrium modeling, when most economists in the past only used the method due to lack of computational methods of running more complex models. His note worthy achievements are writing a systems dynamics model of an economy, and publicly predicting the 07-08 financial crash in about 2004.
Yeap!
The normal distribution is simply the limit of the binomial distribution as the number of trials N, becomes sufficiently large. In the context of intelligence, the trials are embodied by the total set of genes that influence intelligence, with each gene having different alleles that either sightly raise or lower one's IQ. Since it's hypothesized about 10,000 genes affect intelligence, a normal distribution naturally models it very well.
Did you know that Ludwig van Beethoven wrote all his "stuff" when he was drunk? That he subsisted on 'fortified wine' (AKA port).
And that in the arts of 'music' and 'letters,' _sober_ "creative geniuses" are the _exception,_ not the rule?
What say you?
And don't forget the lead
I think it was called lead sugar supposed to be a tonic
I’d have to say,
Attaining a different mind state,
Allows your mind to state things very differently.
Substances can accomplish this.
So can a state of FLOW…which can happen while sober or under the influence.
Dank lecture sir.
32:30 damned, life, noted
You need 2 things of info to calculate the area of a triangle (any 2 mutually independent things: base/height). You need 3 things (independent variables) to recreate the specific triangle. There are many triangles with the same area. So you need less information to describe the groups with same area.
I'm not particularly invested in the formulation of social polices but I do get frustrated at people who are involved in this process without knowing the realities of society. I hope the perspectives discussed in this series of lectures gets picked up by policy makers.
Lmao you think politicians actually want to help you?? Ever heard of lobbyists? Ever wonder why politicians are way richer than their salaries allow for and implement laws that hurt most citizens instead of actually helping?
Have you like never opened up a history book before?
Prediction on thought crimes, yet no one knows what one will do let alone what one can dream of. Who decides what is a dream of consciousness without intent to act or a plan to enact. We run many sensational questions and ideas before we do anything ourselves with consequences, or we should. I thought everyone did, thinking, dreaming, and planning are all different thoughts.
Life is an infinite number of potential covariances.
If I hadn't watched the 2017 lecture before this one, I would have been sooooo confused🤣🤣
Who would ever down-vote this?
I'm watching this while taking shots of cheep Canadian whiskey
vodka for me
bobrobert1123 get some Sierra mist. Then you can have a mist n mist.
FirstHalfMoon 1734 black velvet 😉
bobrobert1123 🎶 .....if you please...🎶
Thats two mistakes.
Cheap and canadian.
44:45 is when it all comes together. humanity is terrifying
More on alcoholism please
where is lecture 19?
damn straight @ 41:00
I want to know why CZcams has started buffering on all my favorite videos ?? Doesn’t seem arbitrary to me.
at 7:02 jordon recommends "black swan" taleb's book...and taleb calls him a charlatan...i guess jordon is a black swan in taleb's worldview of experts and academicians
@@mikekane2492 yeah he was naming stuff and his catchy names and pretty solid definitions stuck around. his work is not deep and people started building up on his popular names, and he calls them charlton instead of being a critic of their work.
@@vu3atg835 who's work isn't deep? Peterson or Taleb? and why is that (I realize that the person you replied to deleted his comment, can you explain it again?)
Here any who had bad grades in school, but as you know we are creative?
Here is my solution using hypnosis with regression and take as much information from the person so you can make solid statistics.
Im introvert pretending im extrovert becose i was so lonely without friends and i chose a job as a musician and postman.
I was so much under stress
11:00 min Can anyone elaborate in few ways the equation he was speaking of?
1. What is the name of the equation?
2. What was the formula? e, i, pi ?
3. An interpretation of what it means ? Por please.🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽
as far as i am concerned he was speaking about the equation e^(iπ)+1 = 0, and I ve understand it as a equation for zero but idk maybe you will find further information on the internet
1. It is a form (special case) of Euler's Identity.
2. 𝑒^(𝑖𝜋) + 1 = 0
3. It's mathematics, not sure what level of meaning you seek.
NB:
- the equation is often cited as the most beautiful in mathematics, because it references the most important entities: the numbers 0, 1 and 𝑖. And the constants 𝑒 and 𝜋.
- the ^ symbols means 'to the power of', most of the time written in superscript.
- You should be able to easily see that 𝑒^(𝑖𝜋) = -1
- 𝑖 is a weird number. So-called complex number, very abstract.
Best regards
Underachieving Physics dropout, freelance web developer, almost 40. But does take responsibility for 5 children (same mother). Currently in the desert, hoping to cross the ocean soon, already live near the beach 😉).
Anyone has a job for me a SpaceX (or similar), to boost my 'progress'? Could use the serotonine.🦞😭
- medium high agreeableness
- high in neurotisism
- high openness (both aspects)
- slightly introverted
- low in consciencesness (working on this)
Working on orderliness of my office. And since my order of acting is: feel, think, do. I can prevent myself to some degree from becoming too unproductive and corrupt (although I am at the bottom of that atm).
10:00- Electrons behave deterministically, not statistically. They follow Hund's rule, but perhaps this was a bit out of Dr. P's wheelhouse.
They don’t always Hund’s rule when they’re in an excited state. I’m not a scientist yet but isn’t your statement to simplified ? You might be hinting at the observation experiment of electrons, but isn’t quantum mechanics built on statistics ?
I love coke zero!!!
no cc??? why????
57:00
“After 3-4 years, experience won’t help you any more…” Regarding progression in a role, at a job.
Most people subscribe to a…🤔
Let’s call it, the “FINITE fallacy.”
This is the fallacy that I just made up, but also states that a person at one of several moments in their life (high school, college, work, etc.) decides that they have accrued the FINITE amount of knowledge or experience to be gained.
They STOP learning, because the FINITE amount of knowledge that they have accrued has finally satisfied a certain demand, in a limited fashion.
Those that DON’T subscribe to this fallacy, are the ONLY ones capable of becoming an outlier, with regards to competence, knowledge and/or experience.
EXAMPLE:
The person who enters a small business, and can only see their current role, current business model and are too ignorant of the potential, outside of what is immediately evident.
Just curious, is he pronouncing “randomization” “random-ass-ination”?
Random assignation, gotta love his pronunciation 😂
I will disagree with Dr. Peterson. The people on the 0% end of the Pareto distribution are not dangerous because they have nothing to lose. They are dangerous because they have nothing to do.
In the context of dominance hierarchies, is there a difference? If you're useless, you don't have a position on the hierarchy so you have nothing to lose. Only way is up.
not a big difference really.
william downey
No! It is a big difference. Not having anything to do includes the idea that they just need a hobby. Not having anything to lose brings the ability to do the most dangerous things. Oh, if you don't have anything to do, you can end up not having anything to lose. This can't work vise versa.
Idle hands?
Both
16:54, 26:47, bis hier in alles erklärung zu endogenitätsproblemen, kausalität testen 29:32 30:57,,, welche ernährungsform ist die beste? --> keine kausalen aussagen möglich 31:45,, --> erklärung p-wert 41:30 42:24 abnehmender grenznutzen 43:30 nach vielen runden bleiben nur noch wenige reich (normalkurve wird zur pareto-kurve) 1:03:43,, pareto-kurve der gesellschaft
"As society becomes more technological, the degree to which the pareto distribution is going to kick in is going to increase." - this would be less scary if we could play the right game.
I don't know what that might be, maybe to obtain the most fulfilling life for the most people. In such a case the greatest beneficiaries of the pareto distribution should be the ones who provide the most value back into the system. For such a thing to succeed, this couldn't be in a homogenous authoritarian way because people are not fulfilled under homogeneity. Increasing fulfillment in life might mean providing work in some cases, it might mean providing more leisure, it might mean being an antagonist. The complexity is unfathomable to keep up with, but maybe infinite computational power could make it possible to work at the degree of subtlety required. Of course nobody can really say what the real goal of humanity is..