Hahah well put. Jordan is more right tho, they served for something so they are good and should not be merely be thrown out as fiction after having guided us.
@@unknownsource5787 It's not the fact that they are fictions that is concerning, it's the fact that the fictions are acted upon as if they have more utility than they actually do. And Jordan's pragmatism is too intermittent.
@@bootyman234 "acted upon as if they have more utility than they actually do" and what is the issue there? ok maybe people become over fictitious for acting on fictions that lead them to greater good, personally I don't see it an issue. Maybe you might want to expound on that and the comment on jordan's pragmatism? Appreciate that.
@@seanseah333 What I was trying to convey, is that while myth does indeed serve as a guide of sorts to what may be thought of as proper living, there are aspects of life (especially 21 century life) and the human condition that aren't really effectively addressed. And what I mean by that, is Christianity, for example, directs the aspirant to have faith as the primary source of strength and even understanding! when dealing with said human condition. But! Anyone who is or ever was a proponent of this ideology, knows that faith "alone" cant provide the transfomative power necessary for change! YOU gotta put in the work. The saying "God helps those who help themselves" has always been so transparent to me. Your helping yourself, is the only actual help you're getting. And then we have prayer. We know now as common knowledge, that the only ACTUAL utility prayer MAY have is strictly psychological at best. Because praying for the ability to control your temper, say, pales in comparison to speaking with professionals who can explain to you how to do it, and perhaps even why it may be especially difficult for you in particular! Christianity is seemingly more about deeds, rather than emphasis on a transformation of consciousness. And with regard to the "greater good" I'm not sure I ever really understood exactly what that's suppose to mean. "Good" whatever that means, should be good enough. Greater good sounds like needless hyperbole, and good itself is a seemingly relative term. And lastly, to Jordan's pragmatism. I say it's intermittent because he can make use of it to a point, but when it yields no definite conclusions, rather than saying "I don't know", he goes off on emotional tangents reflected in how prone to ideation he is; Then we have to endure abstract and convoluted concepts about the metaphysical substrate of our ethos! JEESUS! =) P.S. Hats off to you for asking your question in such a civilized manner. Not many can pull that off when discussing such feather ruffling subjects.
Stumbled upon this in 2018 and instantly knew I was too stupid to make any sense of it. Two years later my room is cleaned and I'm finally smart enough to extract something out of this incredible talk. What a journey!
You're not lying. When I first heard either of these men speak I was too dim to actually grasp onto any modicum of understanding. Now it somehow sounds like any other conversation. Granted you go in with the forethought that these men speak on a completely different wavelength than the vast majority of the human population.
I believe he tries to help us believe in the infinite as distinct from the finite. For some people that might be God: for others Gaia. The important thing is its transcendent nature. Without a belief in something bigger than ourselves we're faced only with nihilism because we know our own busted flush.
I also believe Peterson helps us to consider that religious teachings have provide *some* good and important components to society. As well, there is some evidence that this has some link to neuro/psychological sciences. Believe in it or not is irrelevant, it has contributed to our social experience.
I never would have imagined enjoying something like this, but it’s absolutely enthralling. I’ve listened to three of them in a row, and did it while completing an extreme detailing of my car. The recent advancements in technology have no doubt had some seriously negative consequences, but for me today it was awesome.
Dr. Peterson, you are just flat out amazing. I have a doctorate in Computer Science/Network Engineering and a Master's in Physics with minor in Neuroscience. I like Sam Harris, and like to believe I have a fair understanding of his position...however, YOU are the one I find myself agreeing with more. You are a beautiful human being, don't let your proclivity for potential negative self-reflection get you down. You are by-far the most influential person I have listened to in my entire adult life. Thank you and Sam for your guys' discussions.
@Naurius I appreciate your input. I'm sure you could imagine, being my age I have had many of my own positions on a plethora of subjects. To say I agree with someone does not mean I don't have my own thoughts on the subject. A good example would be, I have a fair understanding of Quantum Mechanics, I tend to lean more towards m-theory being a good explanation for the linear time conundrum. However, many people think string theory is a better solution. String theory holds much of the same constraints as m-theory but the theory comes to an entirely different conclusion in regards to linear time. At the end, you can't argue that people such as myself and people that believe string theory don't believe in Physics. The presumption is a given, considering they are contemplating a theory housed within the confines of a parent subject, Physics. The same can be concluded in regards to my beliefs, just because I agree with someone on a topic doesn't mean I haven't thought about the topic on my own...it merely shows I have thought extensively and inevitably came to the same conclusion as the person I'm praising.
@@ronpaul9172 what did u learn about in ur minor in neuroscience? were your studies pharmacological, imaging related?(i.e., diffusion tensor imaging, MRI/fMRI, Ct scans), anatomy/pathology. circuit analysis or more centered on behaviorism?
@@rollsreus3862 Hello Pranav, In my early neuroscience courses, we went over a large swathe of material. First, we studied "how" neuroscientists study the brain, evolution, energetics, the ten-percent myth, neurons and the chemical basis of brain signaling, perceptions, illusions, pain, movement, etc. Halfway through my first course, we went over memory, learning, self-control and willpower, stress and adaptation. We then focused on infancy, early development, aging, genes, environment, etc. Basically, we started out learning the fundamentals. Halfway through, we focused on neural circuit motifs, kinesins, R-C circuits, Binomial distribution, Poisson distribution, calculating neurotransmitter release probability, signal transduction, tyrosine kinase signaling, etc. etc. I had a lot of fun taking those courses, but I will be the first to say I am no expert on the subject.
I have much love for the both of these men and I want to say that I very much thoroughly enjoyed this dialogue. It’s very interesting to see both sides of life and perception come together as one to discuss an issue which can create a monumental movement which I believe is the one to revolutionise the way we live our daily lives and treat one another - the next giant leap for mankind and humanity itself. To witness this in my lifetime here on Earth astounds me, second to having the ability of understanding this highly intellectual and challenging level of discussion with the two having both great admiration and respect for another is something so rare that it has compelled me to write this which i think is extraordinary. Much peace and love to the both of these human beings and I hope I would be able to see more. The light in my room is not so dark after all. Thank you and Kind Regards.
@@supers0nic77 I consider winter a season of reflection or for reflection ,I also believe that the cold is a good stimuli for the whole body ,I go outside in the winter almost as much as I do in summer ,it's invigorating and so beautiful to walk through a crystalized forest of trees ,it causes me to stop and thank the creator for such beauty ,nothing like a crystalized forest to sit down and ponder and just relax.
Well anyone this smart is smart enough not to become a public servant. There's a fundamental cap in the IQ of politicians because it is insane to want to be a high ranking public official
What a privilege to listen to three such intelligent and articulate people. The impression I get from all three of them is that, no matter how they currently think, they are more interested in understanding the issues and learning from each other than in being right.
Beyond the practical advice to get your shit together, Peterson is worse than useless. It’s good if he helped you, but I’d encourage you to not stop with him.
You realize that Jordan is saying that the majority of the people are stupid and we need religion because these people have the ability to rationalize but they don't and religious people have been proven over and over to have a lower iq
Thank you for having these conversations. Through these engagements we can formulate a way forward. Civil discourse, the essential path to understanding.
I can't imagine how exhausted these two are after a discussion like this. It has to take an unbelievable amount of cognitive energy, and emotional capacity to do this for two hours.
I wondered that myself but then realised that I engage with my family, friends and colleagues in some really intense and interesting discussions similar to this for hours on end (but not by any stretch of the imagination with as much forethought as Peterson and Harris have put into this). If you're interested in the topic as these two certainly are then it likely flows very naturally. Especially given the books they've written and the debates they have participated in. I suspect the debates and worse still, interviews with some very unreasonable individuals rather than these discussions are far more exhausting
This is an absolutely fascinating discussion. Two highly intelligent men, at opposite ends of the spectrum, exploring each other’s ideas, respectfully. I wish we could have more of this in the world.
@@Fr_87 Do we? They're actually both very much in the political center. If you see opposites here, you'll need to explain that perception to the rest of us.
@@Fr_87spicyyyy - Sam harris is the devil who points out the sin of being human and has you retreat to the "obvious" and "rational" good. Reason so true that Raskolnikov would kill.
yes, it was so respectful how sam at every non-chance was trying to get a word in between jordan's kind intercessions. and then "I cant believe his amazing counter response got applause" from sam. this guy is unbearable in the face of a truly wise person.
I love you both Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris. It is indeed such a pleasure and we have to be thankful that such giants can meet and have discussions. Exchange ideas and points of view will open our hearts and minds for new better ideas and thoughts.
Y'all give it up for Jordan or Sam but I think that Douglas knows how to bring it even though he says little, like "they think they're better than their ancestors and don't even bother to study their ancestors."
It's funnier to me because I genuinely wonder if Sam actually catches things like that, or if he rationally deduces that Douglas is only speaking in hypotheticals.
Are you kidding me,,, all this went on 5 yrs back,how did I miss this! Grateful to see this talked about with respect,and care, this is so welcome to witness this only with class and without accusing or the putting down of peoples,thinking and beliefs,also some people may not be religious, but used as guideline,and held personal to themselves!
I grew up in with a christian background but no longer consider myself religious. For a few years I've been reevaluating the idea of god itself and jordan peterson makes me ask myself all the right questions
@@annalouisebay4397 Sad thing is, I don't know how much of it is because of that, or is it just because most people are too stupid and have too short of attention spans that it wouldn't get good ratings?
Liam Fitzpatrick Right, it often amaze me how little most people know about what and what not will interest most people. An example could be that we have had a show where talented painters paint a known person. After the cutting it ends up with a lot of talk and very little painting. My experience is that most of us are facinated by seing people create. We also have a very popular program with a simpel farmer doing all kind of old facion work. But in that case the farmer himself created the program, so it did not get spoild.
This is the second time I have watched this and I am just as thrilled as the first time when it was first released. Civil discourse on such important matters is so important.
Sam Harris really changed my life in terms of critical thinking. I was born and raised in Iran, where religion plays an important role in the masses' daily grind. His insightful debates and books illuminated a lot of facts to me .
@Daniel Grozier I just wanted to say thanks, I don't need to add input but thought if he see these messages from people who appreciate what he says it will help with assessing his impact , I have been hearing a bit of negativity toward his views lately and I personally find him very motivating in a positive direction. I enjoyed this talk because of the topic . I am an atheist and the son of a preacher . More than that I was the forsaken son from a father who worships the forsaken son . So a good topic.
Brian Wilson btw, there is no such thing as chem trails. You’ve been duped into believing that and whole shit ton of other ridiculous stuff about Monsanto and gmo’s, 9/11 being an inside job and man not going to the moon.
Go listen to Jordan "today" post benzo addiciton recovery....this was back in his all meat diet days where if he ate a single salad he'd be sick for weeks days.
what a wonderful stuff. People actually talk to each other, respecting, and allowing other side to build strong arguments. If all discussions looked like this our differences in opinions would unite us and make us respect each other more, and would make us acknowledge that we need the other side in order to learn where we are wrong.
@@davidsoael615 On the contrary, I think he drills to the core of Jordan's side with something like his 1:32:11 question. They all dislike dogmatism, but Jordan and Douglas seem to take a more pragmatic approach than Sam. I actually have started to understand that insane podcast between Jordan and Sam where they kept talking about truth. Specifically, I think I see why Jordan refused to give a simple definition for truth. Sam is too concerned with being "factual" instead of "truthful." This is a distinction that I knew about but didn't have these two words for until I heard them described by Michael Malice. For a great example, I recommend an internet search for the dangerous chemical "dihydrogen monoxide" to see how easily facts can diverge from the ultimate truth (about water). The oversimplified argument goes something like this: Sam: "Is Christianity 100% true and is there God? I say 'no'." Jordan & Douglas: "That's actually irrelevant. We have 'bigger fish to fry', so to speak." Does that make sense? Curious of your thoughts.
Same. . . . . and then bust out an expletive filled neuroscience rap, which would end with him pulling his shoulders back and making lobter claw hand signs, saying "you don't f**k with the top lobster b***h". . . . . . drop mic
1:15:40 Great decision guys. I'm really enjoying this conversation, I'm a christian and obviously I feel more inclined to the side of Jordan Peterson, but for the first time I can say that I'm understanding the position of Harris and it's very interesting. Obviously no one cares about what I think but I just wanted to comment anyway.
When Jordan Peterson gets into full flow of expressing his ideas it's mesmerising and inspiring. When he does that, the attention from the audience is palpable.
"Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuses you, even [ fill in the blank here with your favorite teacher ] in whom ye trust." (John 5:45)
Thank you so much for your discussion, it is simply amazingly inspiring! And i had to watch many times to be able to make sense of all what you were saying and make a decent takeaway from it. Peterson's point of extracting father's sprit over time reminds me of collective memory study in science which can happen on many scales and karma in spirituality. Murray's point of "the danger of void" makes perfect sense to me. Murray is so witty... with words or without! lol And i admire the fact that you can remain so silent in this discussion given your own level of thinking. Anyhow, even your facial expression was an important indication in understanding and add to the fun of the debate LOL i also love Harris's point of "hate of unnecessary suffering" which i do echo a lot too. Wishing to be present next time to give you guys an on-the-spot huge applause!!!
I had to concentrate on every word spoken by these three gifted men...just to keep up. A true gift to the rest of us. Both Murray and Harris are brilliant. But even as an atheist, I find Peterson the most compelling....the most gifted communicator.
These men on this stage all are bearers of a purer strain of alien DNA than most of humanity. This is why they have the ability and courage to look into the void and find illumination rather than a frightening chimera. This is what is required through willpower and desire to see is that essence of what we are was never born and so will never die. An "A-Theist," (one who rejects the monotheism doctrines of theism) simply and linguistically means that they have found the concept of theism outmoded for the exceptional consciousness, while in possession of a passion to see the final truth of being is the penultimate attainment in the spiritual life. It is not negating at all. It is beyond all realms of rationalism. And no attainment can be made through rational thinking. Sunyata comes to those who has suffered so much that they become anxious to let go of the shedded snake skin that we call THE EGO, but you can never let the sacred breath escape your own lips. And to have this attainment, we must live in two worlds thereafter. One world is pure merging with the unknowable vitality of everything there is, all with their own consciousness which has now become your consciousness. The other life that must be lived simultaneously is that of the "Work-a-day world where you have a stake in outcomes, but you pursue those outcomes with a compassionate heart.
@@robertmacdonnell258 When reading the first few sentences of your comment, I was struck by the cleverness of your humor. And then...slowly...it began to dawn on me that you might be serious. But then I realized that you were really joking. Although a well written out satire it is.
@@robertmacdonnell258 Atheists must reject truth and all virtues as intrinsic. Is good only good when there are people to be good and others to see the good? Is beauty only in the eye of the beholder? Or is there good, evil, beauty and ugliness whether or not there is man? If so, there must be an archetype that is neither man nor even physical.
It's simply incredible to imagine a person such as JP, with all his brilliant ideas, not stumbling upon on his own ego, and instead focusing on the process of thinking rather than the pressumption "I am right, u wrong". He provides enormous amount of honesty and gives us the opportunity to explore alongside with him his ideas.
It's not just the speed at which he so casually formulates an argument its also depth to which he dissects each miniscule iota of thought or issue. Absolutely astounding.
@samuelgizaw7899 - I've been an atheist for 50years and I've never had a problem with my belief because I ignore any attempt to enter my mind or affect my beliefs because they are simple, nothing to argue.
Guys, please listen to BOTH people without trying to validate what you already believe. If you agree with Peterson more, listen to Harris, if you agree with Harris more, listen to Peterson. God I am so tired of how stubborn people are in their beliefs. By the way, if you are a true follower of Peterson then take his advice from 12 Rules. Rule 9 - "Assume that the person you are listening to might know something you don't." From what I see in these comments most of his followers are lazy in thinking and don't actually take his messages to heart.
But I think that's exactly what HAS happened though. Part of Peterson's rise is from former Sam Harris fans that did just this and realized the flaws in the argument and how much it was lacking. Almost all of their audience is overlap even before they ever met, at least before Peterson got so big. Now they tend to just fill each other's gaps, which is why I like their conversations so much.
NICK..Thats a good way of handling beliefs . ITs when you find the middle line (think of a still pendulum ), can you ascend to the apex where both sides of beliefs can be acknowledged, from a position of knowing.
No but something has got to give and it seems that Harris is losing people. I've listened to this guy enough but eventually I'm gonna come to a conclusion. The conclusion is that Harris is either willfully ignorant to Petersons challenges or he truly is limited in how he thinks which is ironic considering the slandering hes given to Petersons stance on things. Hell he gets annoyed when Peterson just attempts at coming to bring up important questions. Hes condescending. Harris is simple minded he isnt here for the same reasons Peterson is here. Peterson is interested in finding answers, interested in what Harris has to say on what he thinks and what he thinks upon what others think, and then comes to his own understandings. I dont for one second believe Harris even opens his mind to the idea of seeing things from Petersons perspective. Or even thinks much about Jordan's words as something even remotely credible when he goes home after these talks. It's spelled out completely in the way he speaks. He acts like hes an expert on everything when it comes to religion and fluffs off everything Peterson is saying, as if all of it can be answered in just a few minutes, like it's so clear cut. His answers are shallow and pander to the cliches that atheists have found themselves repeating for years. People HAVE taken Petersons words to heart, they HAVE listened and even turned against Jordan harshly through listening to Harris on some occasions but it seems to me that Jordan keeps managing to pull people back to what hes trying to figure himself. It's his whole demeanor, the humble way he presents himself. Jordan is more willing to have a conversation, open and honest. Harris is there simply to win. And their is no value in winning for the sheer sake of it is there? I dont think their is much value in that no I dont
I do admire Jordan's use of words, how ever I admire Sam's to the point rationality more. Jordan has made himself a liguistic black belt to be able to reconcile his Christian worldview with reality.
I feel compelled to compliment on the level of civility and eagerness to listen and learn - that the audience in London is showing here. Compare this to Harris-Peterson debate that happened in Vancouver, Canada ! P.S. I am from Canada
What Murray is saying at 1:19:00, I summarise in my motto for life: "Keep an open mind, but not so open that everything falls out". Not EVERY new thing is good. Not EVERY old thing is bad.
I see loads of people missing the point of this conversation. This was not a competition, there is no winner or loser here. Actually there are winners, and it's us. These 2 gentlemen, who spend a big deal of time thinking about these complicated issues have showed us via amazingly well articulated dialogue, which are still the areas that need to be thought out and improved. The fact that they disagree in some fundamental ideas and the fact that they are still willing to have a civilised discussion about it , it's amazing by itself. Cheers to Jordan and Sam, we need more of this in our world.
Sam Harris is actually the one who thinks this is a competition so in the way Sam Harris lost this battle long ago and Jordan B Peterson is actually the one who's trying to find truth.
I was priveleged to attend the Dublin event. My wife attended with me and I sat beside a nice fella who had flown from Italy to attend. It was fascinating. This year my wonderful wife is giving me two of Douglas' books for Christmas and Jordan's new book for my birthday.
A point relevant to Jordan Peterson's "Auschwitz guard" story. My father was a teenager during the nazi occupation of Athens, and he was telling me that one of the most chilling experiences he had, was of an SS officer kicking an obviously very ill, starving man who was lying on the pavement. It was chilling because there was nothing evil about his face: he was a handsome man, with a smile of innocent joy during all this. He was genuinely having innocent fun, in his mind. And it is so chilling because it is so far removed from our established experience of acts of good and evil. A criminal who looks like one and speaks like one, you can deal with. A man like this, that looks like the guy next door, and is not conscious of the pure evil he embodies, is much harder to come to grips with.
The mundanity of evil. It's the worst aspect. Because it brings us all a hairs breadth from being evil ourselves. And since we could never be the "evil" evil, we won't look at that. It's the problem with the woke, they are so sure they are the good guys, so sure they are a million miles away from the bad guys. History doesn't support that view.
If there's one thing that humans can understand more than any other species on Earth is to understand the suffering of another human. When you don't see another person as a human being you can do atrocious things to that person without batting an eyelid.
This is why external appearance is irrelevant and we rely on the ability to see a person's soul/feel their energy. I would say over history, the most beautiful people are the most wicked. Because they think they can be, and they are often elevated by weaker people around them.
Even after four discussions Harris still spent way too much time projecting his assumptions of Peterson's religious beliefs onto Peterson. Rather than, acknowledging Peterson's position is not that of a "typical" religious person, and then working together to hash through the real stuff Peterson alluded to each time, but was never really able to get to. You'd feel Peterson trying to go there and Harris would interrupt saying it was "changing the rules." Meaning he's still not comfortable with thinking about Peterson's ideas as they don't come from that of a "typical" Christian. Hence one of the reasons we're all watching. There's so much more to dig into. I'd love to see it.
Yep. Harris's fundamental view of religious people seems to be that they are simply ignorant of the truth and holding onto dogma as an alternative, however Jordan Peterson has more of a scientific mind and is simply emphasizing the importance of religion (or more importantly, the danger of a lack of religion.)
Sam is far too preoccupied with defeating "Religion" as if it's some clearly defined entity. First, it's not that simple, and 2nd it's a waste of mental resources. I find his preoccupation to be telling. So, I become more interested in the source of his animosity.
His main concern is around unjustified belief (dogma) as he is concerned about the link between belief and behaviour. Religion is an area of dogma he focuses on as it is the only one (although now questionable) that gives succour in the form of virtue to dogma.
This is such a great debate. Don't discount what Douglas and Jordan have said here. The Nihilism is what dominated the late 1800s leading up to WWI and WWII. (USSR AND Germany) wanted to replace Christianity with their own false ideas and false beliefs. They believed in cultish pagan beliefs in the SS which included Christian SS officers just think about that. They basically became like their barbarian ancestors and imposed new dogmas and built a new church called "Deutsch Christianity." There is indeed value in remaining genuinely Christian in the way Jordan describes.
It's so nice to see Dr. Peterson laughing and genuinely loving having such an intellectual argument, rather than debating with idiots that just wanna paint a picture against him.
Sam Harris: "To be fair to the present, most music, most art, and most architecture is no longer religious." Best argument for religion I've ever heard
I really don't see what's the big deal about Harris, I've had better conversations with philosophy professors. Jordan is clearly way beyond his level. His arguments seem to be reached by confirmation bias and nothing else. You can see that he doesn't put much effort into thinking whatever he's talking about. @ dagem abebe Rather than religious, I would say that there's a certain "spirituality" about those things. Jordan usually mentions the weirdness about people going to museums and looking at paintings, I had also thought about that before. I think if you begin to question why do we feel attraction to, for example, music; what makes some sounds better than others, the same with paintings, you see that there's no obvious reason why that is. After thinking about it for quite a while, I think that the main commonality among those apparently irrational attractions is harmony. We have a preconfigured attraction for harmony in colors, sounds, and shapes. The more complex and sophisticated that harmony is, the stronger is the tendency to generate that attraction; you can see that with thousands of people watching a person play an instrument, for example. But why we have that propensity and from where the artists take it from is a mystery.
@dagem abebe The arts in recent, modern times, have been very regressive as of late. Almost in one to one coordination to how fewer people are inspired by God in their lives. At the very least it shows the degenerative inspirations that arise out of a mindset that seeks to be ABSENT from God. And thats why our music and movie industry have been increasingly shit
I thought all that was theater in order to avoid whether or not he actually, literally believes in God. As was the way, in which right after that, he took control of the direction in which the conversation was going, and the new direction into which he threw it, was away from him having to answer that question.
@Richard Muenzer and Mr. Espriella I make this reply to both of you not as a criticism in any way. Mr. Peterson does not give a yes no reply about whether he "believes God exists", and states he lives as if God exists. So it may seem like he is being evasive, but I would like to offer my understanding to the both of you. I do not believe that anyone has direct evidence of the existence of God. Even people that profess a belief in the existence of God. People that believe in the existence of God believe that by being maximally inclusive of all evidence that it is overwhelmingly dishonest to claim that God does not exist. The evidence is so convincing that they claim with honesty that they believe that God exists. It is their personal perspective of God's nature. However, personal perspectives of God's nature differ as everyone knows. So it is not a simple matter to ask someone if they believe in your personal perception of what you understand as the definition of God. Perhaps insight into what I am explaining can be found in learning that discuss that intractable relationship between humbleness and understanding. Mr. Peterson is extraordinarily consistent in this as he highlights his humble approach to daring questions of definitive conclusion of God's existence. Instead he opts to maintain honesty above all and cautiously warns of any person recklessly claiming a universal understanding of the nature and existence of God. So he allows the evidence to guide him, and thus far it overwhelmingly inspires him to live as though God exists.
Great talk, I did have to keep going back and forth to ChatGPT to have a bunch of words explained, however, and several book references summarised 😅. I'm getting a pounding headache.
That is one of the reasons why they talked past each other. I think that Harris is against dogmas, because you can't question them(which leads to numerous problems, he said it in the other video). While Peterson only talks about teachings itself. We can demolish dogmatic teachings without any repercussions.
Fair point on dogmas. So once a dogmatic teaching has been demolished what would you "prefer" takes it place? Send your response to austinajames7@gmail.com so I can be notified quicker if you respond to my question
@@Apol-los No need for gmail. Answer is short. Any teaching can replace dogma. That is because dogmatic teachings forbids critical thinking, questioning(they tend to not change with time or facts) while any other teachings, they change given new information. Example, dogmatic teachings : any religion. Non dogmatic teachings: laws, set of beliefs based on evidence or anything like that.
@@Apol-los I didn't really have any dogmatic teachings. In my country religion is more of a cultural thing. And my basic beliefs constantly changes with new information I have. Set of beliefs that I live by are custom ones, I didn't really took them from anywhere, so I can't give good example that would fit for everyone. But partly good example is law, or anything based on evidence.
I was going to agree, but being generous i would say that i'm not sure that Sam isn't open to finding out the truth. In his numerous books he has explored these topics deeply, and i don't think that that comes from only wanting to win the discussion. He has been pursuing the truth and it has led him to agree with Peterson on a lot of what he has had to say.
Through reading Iain McGilchrist’s work I got to understand that this is a matter of right brain dominance vs left brain dominance. The right hemisphere deals with the unknown. The left deals with the known. The right hemisphere is about seeking possibilities, the left about predictability.
The fact that you cannot explain why makes it clear to me your bias for taking Jordans side instead of listening to both of them objectively. Take a step back and revaluate your observation because it is not true. Both are after the truth.
as an agnostic, I wish every religious person was like Dr. Jordan peterson, he is a brilliant man! sam harris is also a wonderful scientist who helped me a lot in the past to find the evil camouflaged in the religion I subscribed to in the past.
I know I could be wrong but God is number one to me. I really appreciate religious, agnostic and atheist speakers who discuss topics respectfully. Most of my loved ones don't believe as I do but all of them love me back. I hope we can all remain free to express ourselves civilly.
JP is clearly arguing for the value of religion, where Sam is arguing it is unnecessary. They both clearly hear each others arguments. Neither is being dismissive of each other. Some of JP's premises are also false, and to my disbelief, Sam agreed with them. Although I'm pleased Sam corrected his incorrect definition of atheism.
Sam: They're guiding fictions. But they're still fictions.
Jordan: They're guiding fictions. But they're still guiding.
Hahah well put. Jordan is more right tho, they served for something so they are good and should not be merely be thrown out as fiction after having guided us.
This should be pinned.
@@unknownsource5787 It's not the fact that they are fictions that is concerning, it's the fact that the fictions are acted upon as if they have more utility than they actually do. And Jordan's pragmatism is too intermittent.
@@bootyman234 "acted upon as if they have more utility than they actually do" and what is the issue there? ok maybe people become over fictitious for acting on fictions that lead them to greater good, personally I don't see it an issue. Maybe you might want to expound on that and the comment on jordan's pragmatism? Appreciate that.
@@seanseah333 What I was trying to convey, is that while myth does indeed serve as a guide of sorts to what may be thought of as proper living, there are aspects of life (especially 21 century life) and the human condition that aren't really effectively addressed. And what I mean by that, is Christianity, for example, directs the aspirant to have faith as the primary source of strength and even understanding! when dealing with said human condition. But! Anyone who is or ever was a proponent of this ideology, knows that faith "alone" cant provide the transfomative power necessary for change! YOU gotta put in the work. The saying "God helps those who help themselves" has always been so transparent to me. Your helping yourself, is the only actual help you're getting.
And then we have prayer. We know now as common knowledge, that the only ACTUAL utility prayer MAY have is strictly psychological at best. Because praying for the ability to control your temper, say, pales in comparison to speaking with professionals who can explain to you how to do it, and perhaps even why it may be especially difficult for you in particular!
Christianity is seemingly more about deeds, rather than emphasis on a transformation of consciousness.
And with regard to the "greater good" I'm not sure I ever really understood exactly what that's suppose to mean. "Good" whatever that means, should be good enough. Greater good sounds like needless hyperbole, and good itself is a seemingly relative term.
And lastly, to Jordan's pragmatism. I say it's intermittent because he can make use of it to a point, but when it yields no definite conclusions, rather than saying "I don't know", he goes off on emotional tangents reflected in how prone to ideation he is; Then we have to endure abstract and convoluted concepts about the metaphysical substrate of our ethos! JEESUS! =)
P.S. Hats off to you for asking your question in such a civilized manner. Not many can pull that off when discussing such feather ruffling subjects.
Stumbled upon this in 2018 and instantly knew I was too stupid to make any sense of it. Two years later my room is cleaned and I'm finally smart enough to extract something out of this incredible talk. What a journey!
Awesome! Congrats 👏🏽
Right. It's amazing to keep up. Finally we are no longer " the left behind people"
Wow! So true and very relatable!
You're not lying. When I first heard either of these men speak I was too dim to actually grasp onto any modicum of understanding. Now it somehow sounds like any other conversation. Granted you go in with the forethought that these men speak on a completely different wavelength than the vast majority of the human population.
good man !
Teacher: “No talking in class”
Me and the boys in the back of the room:
Hahahha should def be on the top of the comment section
this is so fucking hilarious
Make sure you make your bed and standup straight and be controlled dangerous men -- by-the-by -- and then you can be disruptive.
Douglas as moderator was a real stroke of genius. I'm so impressed by him.
dougles had so much fun watching 2 gients sparring it out in front of him, i wonder why we dont see it more. please JP please Sam do it again
Well, he is an atheist that believes in the necessity of keeping religion alive.He was perfect for this.
A Canadian, a Brit and an American walked into a room....
@@RoddyPipersCorneas hahahaha nice
@@RoddyPipersCorneas Could you make those burgers plain=no cheese? If yes you got a deal.
... a void
@@RoddyPipersCorneas dont forget to add some drinks while you are at it
@@RoddyPipersCorneas Jordan Peterson at this point spends more time in America anyway.
I never felt he was trying to make me believe in god. It helped me to understand where the idea of god came from and respect that.
Totally perfectly summarised
I believe he tries to help us believe in the infinite as distinct from the finite. For some people that might be God: for others Gaia. The important thing is its transcendent nature. Without a belief in something bigger than ourselves we're faced only with nihilism because we know our own busted flush.
I also believe Peterson helps us to consider that religious teachings have provide *some* good and important components to society. As well, there is some evidence that this has some link to neuro/psychological sciences. Believe in it or not is irrelevant, it has contributed to our social experience.
Perspective in polarity, excellent!
But in what ways are ideas connected to reality? We can't say theism was just an idea. It's the idea that it's connected to what is.
I can't believe surviving almost two hours listening to a conversation. Thank you very much to all the speakers, sponsors, audience and organisers.
List to joe rogans podcast it will become a new norm
I never would have imagined enjoying something like this, but it’s absolutely enthralling. I’ve listened to three of them in a row, and did it while completing an extreme detailing of my car. The recent advancements in technology have no doubt had some seriously negative consequences, but for me today it was awesome.
That's exactly when I'd most enjoy listening to talks like these lol Sounds like a blast.
Same, but while washing the dishes & cleaning the kitchen. I now have something to look forward to instead of dread.
Dr. Peterson, you are just flat out amazing. I have a doctorate in Computer Science/Network Engineering and a Master's in Physics with minor in Neuroscience. I like Sam Harris, and like to believe I have a fair understanding of his position...however, YOU are the one I find myself agreeing with more. You are a beautiful human being, don't let your proclivity for potential negative self-reflection get you down. You are by-far the most influential person I have listened to in my entire adult life.
Thank you and Sam for your guys' discussions.
Yes.
@Naurius I appreciate your input. I'm sure you could imagine, being my age I have had many of my own positions on a plethora of subjects. To say I agree with someone does not mean I don't have my own thoughts on the subject. A good example would be, I have a fair understanding of Quantum Mechanics, I tend to lean more towards m-theory being a good explanation for the linear time conundrum. However, many people think string theory is a better solution. String theory holds much of the same constraints as m-theory but the theory comes to an entirely different conclusion in regards to linear time. At the end, you can't argue that people such as myself and people that believe string theory don't believe in Physics. The presumption is a given, considering they are contemplating a theory housed within the confines of a parent subject, Physics. The same can be concluded in regards to my beliefs, just because I agree with someone on a topic doesn't mean I haven't thought about the topic on my own...it merely shows I have thought extensively and inevitably came to the same conclusion as the person I'm praising.
@Naurius what is a fanboy to you? Stop throwing buzz words around and stick to sensible discourse
@@ronpaul9172 what did u learn about in ur minor in neuroscience? were your studies pharmacological, imaging related?(i.e., diffusion tensor imaging, MRI/fMRI, Ct scans), anatomy/pathology. circuit analysis or more centered on behaviorism?
@@rollsreus3862 Hello Pranav,
In my early neuroscience courses, we went over a large swathe of material. First, we studied "how" neuroscientists study the brain, evolution, energetics, the ten-percent myth, neurons and the chemical basis of brain signaling, perceptions, illusions, pain, movement, etc.
Halfway through my first course, we went over memory, learning, self-control and willpower, stress and adaptation. We then focused on infancy, early development, aging, genes, environment, etc.
Basically, we started out learning the fundamentals. Halfway through, we focused on neural circuit motifs, kinesins, R-C circuits, Binomial distribution, Poisson distribution, calculating neurotransmitter release probability, signal transduction, tyrosine kinase signaling, etc. etc.
I had a lot of fun taking those courses, but I will be the first to say I am no expert on the subject.
"He's probably cheating on me"
Me and the boys:
🤣 🤣 🤣 true
😇
i wish the boys can actually do this
Haha yep!
Too real
I have much love for the both of these men and I want to say that I very much thoroughly enjoyed this dialogue. It’s very interesting to see both sides of life and perception come together as one to discuss an issue which can create a monumental movement which I believe is the one to revolutionise the way we live our daily lives and treat one another - the next giant leap for mankind and humanity itself. To witness this in my lifetime here on Earth astounds me, second to having the ability of understanding this highly intellectual and challenging level of discussion with the two having both great admiration and respect for another is something so rare that it has compelled me to write this which i think is extraordinary. Much peace and love to the both of these human beings and I hope I would be able to see more. The light in my room is not so dark after all.
Thank you and Kind Regards.
Beautifully articulated! 🥰💯
Gracias por los subs en español. Abrazo gigante para el genio de Jordan en 2022. Espero que se encuentre mucho mejor de salud!
The speed with which jordan comes up with incredible contributions here is simply extraordinary
Canadians are so underrated and underestimated, hahaha,I like it when they doubt us.
@@markdemell3717 maybe long winters help develop the mind.
@@supers0nic77 I consider winter a season of reflection or for reflection ,I also believe that the cold is a good stimuli for the whole body ,I go outside in the winter almost as much as I do in summer ,it's invigorating and so beautiful to walk through a crystalized forest of trees ,it causes me to stop and thank the creator for such beauty ,nothing like a crystalized forest to sit down and ponder and just relax.
@@markdemell3717 Beautiful...but who is that creator you refer to?
@@DutchmanAmsterdam My father ,who else? Have a nice day ,I put in my two cents and I really don't care what you think of me .Bye now!
Wow, If only our politicians could have discussions like this!
They aren't this smart...
So true and relevant to the recent debate. If only!
The MEEK shall inherit the earth.
Well anyone this smart is smart enough not to become a public servant. There's a fundamental cap in the IQ of politicians because it is insane to want to be a high ranking public official
I think in the next 10-15 years, younger candidates will start doing it, and I think they’ll be doing it on long-form podcasts.
This conversation will never get old.
What a privilege to listen to three such intelligent and articulate people. The impression I get from all three of them is that, no matter how they currently think, they are more interested in understanding the issues and learning from each other than in being right.
I’m praying for you Jordan. Get well and give us more of this. It’s helped me so much.
Beyond the practical advice to get your shit together, Peterson is worse than useless. It’s good if he helped you, but I’d encourage you to not stop with him.
sybo59 you can’t just make a blank statement like that and just expect people to listen to you
A podcast with her daughter is just out
You must be over the 🌒!
You realize that Jordan is saying that the majority of the people are stupid and we need religion because these people have the ability to rationalize but they don't and religious people have been proven over and over to have a lower iq
As a teacher, JBP speaks like a flowchart it's insane how he just keeps going and strings things together. So great to follow.
He has a real knack for breaking everything down, which is a sign of his great intellectual capabilities.
Exactly.
Lucky that you can follow him @_@ Amazing brain indeed
@@Johnwilkinsonofficial Never heard him say such things.
@@Johnwilkinsonofficialhe actually turned me on to Daoism
Thank you for having these conversations. Through these engagements we can formulate a way forward. Civil discourse, the essential path to understanding.
This was fantastic. A sincere thank you to all involved.
This is like watching my brain argue with itself.
Wow ur so smart
Ditto
OMG! I feel youuu 🤣🤣🤣
Occasional
You wish ;)
Idea for a podcast:
Joe Rogan takes Jordan and Sam out into the woods, they all take mushrooms, sit around a fire talking until dawn.
They all already did individually, which is the best way to connect to the collective soul.
Well, Jordan did say he was planning to integrate mushrooms into his carnivore diet in a Joe Rogan podcast.
I’d watch and want to join
AND THEN ALEX JONES JUMPS FORWARD FORM BEHIND THE BUSHES HALF NAKED IN FULL CAMO BODYPAINT
Blood would be shed that night
Douglas summed it all up at the end.
Beautiful and thought provoking.
Thank you.
Hi Douglas Murray - first time hearing you! You're amazing! ♥️🇳🇿 Watching from New Zealand 🇳🇿💐🌹
J.P is so passionate , full of heart and soul, he lays it all on the stage. What a Beautiful mind. Respect Mr .Peterson.
why does he?
David Eldred. Camping Wilder indeed.
Nno nb. Pc pnpnnoc
I'm on Sam's side 100% but jp is the man and hope he gets back to full health
Everyone’s gangsta until Jordan Peterson “gets all cognitive neuroscience up on this shhhiiall we”.
I can't imagine how exhausted these two are after a discussion like this. It has to take an unbelievable amount of cognitive energy, and emotional capacity to do this for two hours.
I wondered that myself but then realised that I engage with my family, friends and colleagues in some really intense and interesting discussions similar to this for hours on end (but not by any stretch of the imagination with as much forethought as Peterson and Harris have put into this). If you're interested in the topic as these two certainly are then it likely flows very naturally. Especially given the books they've written and the debates they have participated in. I suspect the debates and worse still, interviews with some very unreasonable individuals rather than these discussions are far more exhausting
Wait. This is the second comment I've come across that denies the presence of a third debater.
I thought the same. They must have had headaches afterwards.
@@crimson_idol it's a sport to them.
What’s amazing is how fresh everything they are saying is considering they had just had this conversation two days earlier in Ireland.
These conversations were pure gold.
Thamk you for this and i Hope they come to the Philippines too. These ideas and speakers are moreso needed in these times we are in now.
This is an absolutely fascinating discussion. Two highly intelligent men, at opposite ends of the spectrum, exploring each other’s ideas, respectfully. I wish we could have more of this in the world.
@@alegriart I think we know what spectrum that they're on opposite sides of. Yikes.
@@Fr_87 Do we? They're actually both very much in the political center. If you see opposites here, you'll need to explain that perception to the rest of us.
@@Fr_87spicyyyy - Sam harris is the devil who points out the sin of being human and has you retreat to the "obvious" and "rational" good. Reason so true that Raskolnikov would kill.
Except Sam kept interrupting Peterson
yes, it was so respectful how sam at every non-chance was trying to get a word in between jordan's kind intercessions. and then "I cant believe his amazing counter response got applause" from sam. this guy is unbearable in the face of a truly wise person.
“When we mature, our image of God changes, but God doesn’t change.” - Carl Jung
My god changes everyday it twist turns and makes life it is our mother it is earth- fiddibelow
Which is why we cannot define God for ourselves.. we tend to make one in our own image and to our own liking... ending up with an idol.
Beautiful
fiddibelow that’s not God. That’s you being emotional and neurotic
is it also possible that when we mature as a civilization, our knowledge of what's true changes, but truth doesn't change?
This was one of the most interesting, important, relevant debates/discussions at present
I love you both Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris. It is indeed such a pleasure and we have to be thankful that such giants can meet and have discussions. Exchange ideas and points of view will open our hearts and minds for new better ideas and thoughts.
Who else is spending their Friday night watching this masterpiece
+Jammy joe oooo you got alphad, beta
All the lucky ones.
Christmas eve 🤣
It’s 2021 ... A Friday Night ... and I’m watching this.
How weird I am watching this on a Friday night and came across this comment 2years later btw
Y'all give it up for Jordan or Sam but I think that Douglas knows how to bring it even though he says little, like "they think they're better than their ancestors and don't even bother to study their ancestors."
One of my favorite arguments in this entire video.
It's funnier to me because I genuinely wonder if Sam actually catches things like that, or if he rationally deduces that Douglas is only speaking in hypotheticals.
Right? And the Schopenhauer quote: "maybe truth is like water and needs vessels to carry it"!
So on point. Those who study our ancestors seem to be quite fascinated by what they knew, which sheds light on how much we have lost.
@@jaket5751 Yeah and what religious people - perhaps on an unconscious level - fear we might be losing
Are you kidding me,,, all this went on 5 yrs back,how did I miss this! Grateful to see this talked about with respect,and care, this is so welcome to witness this only with class and without accusing or the putting down of peoples,thinking and beliefs,also some people may not be religious, but used as guideline,and held personal to themselves!
My thoughts exactly, im just watching now
Omg! My head hurts! 🤯 However I can’t stop watching it’s so fascinating! Love all 3 of these brilliant men!! 💜
I'm glad to see newer comments. Conversations like this are a gift to society
I love thinking about the implications... the streaming video wave is up there with fire, in terms of significance.
I grew up in with a christian background but no longer consider myself religious. For a few years I've been reevaluating the idea of god itself and jordan peterson makes me ask myself all the right questions
Same
So good hearing them discuss important topics with a certain level of respect 🙏.
Can’t believe I’m listening to this 2 hour conversation for the 3rd time this year, 2023, August 10th. So deep!!!
Why is no one talking about the lobster tie?
It has had many appearances :)
I bought one from his website!
There was lots of talk about lobsters, hence the tie. Haha.
DAyum!!!!!! Spectacular Observation!!!!
If you watch a lot of JP, you will see that tie and he talked a lot about that when he schooled the British TV woman about the lobster.
I'll never understand why broadcasters don't show discussions like this on tv.
HomegymMan ISYMFS They don’t want us to think for ourselves!
@@annalouisebay4397 Sad thing is, I don't know how much of it is because of that, or is it just because most people are too stupid and have too short of attention spans that it wouldn't get good ratings?
It exposes their ulterior motives!
Liam Fitzpatrick Right, it often amaze me how little most people know about what and what not will interest most people. An example could be that we have had a show where talented painters paint a known person. After the cutting it ends up with a lot of talk and very little painting. My experience is that most of us are facinated by seing people create. We also have a very popular program with a simpel farmer doing all kind of old facion work. But in that case the farmer himself created the program, so it did not get spoild.
hard to sell sponsorships (advertising) against this - J&J or Kraft do not want to offend anyone! all about the $
This is the second time I have watched this and I am just as thrilled as the first time when it was first released. Civil discourse on such important matters is so important.
Sam Harris really changed my life in terms of critical thinking. I was born and raised in Iran, where religion plays an important role in the masses' daily grind. His insightful debates and books illuminated a lot of facts to me .
J.P. I can't say how many of your videos I have watched, so many . I never message. I just wanted to say thank you .
@Daniel Grozier I just wanted to say thanks, I don't need to add input but thought if he see these messages from people who appreciate what he says it will help with assessing his impact , I have been hearing a bit of negativity toward his views lately and I personally find him very motivating in a positive direction. I enjoyed this talk because of the topic . I am an atheist and the son of a preacher . More than that I was the forsaken son from a father who worships the forsaken son . So a good topic.
Loved Pet Sounds
Brian Wilson btw, there is no such thing as chem trails. You’ve been duped into believing that and whole shit ton of other ridiculous stuff about Monsanto and gmo’s, 9/11 being an inside job and man not going to the moon.
Thank You
@@Dub636 you have no clue what I believe smart guy. Duped? Dupa poopa
Conversations like this are more fulfilling than food itself sometimes. Excellent talk.
Listening to this for the second time - i cannot believe how incedibly articulate these 3 men are.
Go listen to Jordan "today" post benzo addiciton recovery....this was back in his all meat diet days where if he ate a single salad he'd be sick for weeks days.
what a wonderful stuff. People actually talk to each other, respecting, and allowing other side to build strong arguments. If all discussions looked like this our differences in opinions would unite us and make us respect each other more, and would make us acknowledge that we need the other side in order to learn where we are wrong.
Murray’s effortless charm is something to behold. While his input is fewer and further between its magnificent when he adds something
@@davidsoael615 On the contrary, I think he drills to the core of Jordan's side with something like his 1:32:11 question. They all dislike dogmatism, but Jordan and Douglas seem to take a more pragmatic approach than Sam.
I actually have started to understand that insane podcast between Jordan and Sam where they kept talking about truth. Specifically, I think I see why Jordan refused to give a simple definition for truth. Sam is too concerned with being "factual" instead of "truthful." This is a distinction that I knew about but didn't have these two words for until I heard them described by Michael Malice. For a great example, I recommend an internet search for the dangerous chemical "dihydrogen monoxide" to see how easily facts can diverge from the ultimate truth (about water).
The oversimplified argument goes something like this:
Sam: "Is Christianity 100% true and is there God? I say 'no'."
Jordan & Douglas: "That's actually irrelevant. We have 'bigger fish to fry', so to speak."
Does that make sense? Curious of your thoughts.
I can listen to Murray speak all day long. Brilliant man
I thought Jordan was going to say “let’s go all cognitive neuroscience on this shit.” 1:08:20
Jason FAJ 😄😆😅 me too
Same. . . . . and then bust out an expletive filled neuroscience rap, which would end with him pulling his shoulders back and making lobter claw hand signs, saying "you don't f**k with the top lobster b***h". . . . . . drop mic
Remember when Richard Dawkins said "Science, it works...bitches!" That warmed my cold dead heart.
Ha ha ha ..so did I.
I do believe he was planning on it, but quickly and very wisely realized that doing so would literally cleave the planet in two.
Fantastic! Thank you for sharing and doing this!
1:15:40 Great decision guys. I'm really enjoying this conversation, I'm a christian and obviously I feel more inclined to the side of Jordan Peterson, but for the first time I can say that I'm understanding the position of Harris and it's very interesting. Obviously no one cares about what I think but I just wanted to comment anyway.
I want a lobster tie like Jordans! it shows he has a sense of humour and OMG the guy is the Mike Tyson of debate
Great observation, I hadn't realized hahaha
I hope you bought one from his website
Douglas Murry got paid for having the best seat in the house. Good job 👍
Great comment, I love all three of these guys
so glad I found this. excellent discussion between Harris & Peterson.
Wow. I had to find this one. Good stuff.
When Jordan Peterson gets into full flow of expressing his ideas it's mesmerising and inspiring. When he does that, the attention from the audience is palpable.
Yeah, I believe that was the reason why his debate with Matt Dillahunty went so bad.
Personally, I think he waffles on way too much and goes off on a tangent. I much prefer it when it just gets to the point.
Douglas Murray holds his own when sitting between two intellectual giants.
But he doesn't answer the fundamental question of what he believes.
The man is a master of speech
JP changed my life- he’s brilliant! I like Sam Harris and Douglas Murray, too. Great dialogue here!
JP changed my life too. I discovered him and his lectures five years ago and I am happier now than I have ever been thanks to his sage advice.
"Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuses you, even [ fill in the blank here with your favorite teacher ] in whom ye trust." (John 5:45)
Brilliant debate
What do you know, Sam Harris changed my life and I like JP and Douglas Murray too.
Thank you so much for your discussion, it is simply amazingly inspiring! And i had to watch many times to be able to make sense of all what you were saying and make a decent takeaway from it.
Peterson's point of extracting father's sprit over time reminds me of collective memory study in science which can happen on many scales and karma in spirituality.
Murray's point of "the danger of void" makes perfect sense to me. Murray is so witty... with words or without! lol And i admire the fact that you can remain so silent in this discussion given your own level of thinking. Anyhow, even your facial expression was an important indication in understanding and add to the fun of the debate LOL
i also love Harris's point of "hate of unnecessary suffering" which i do echo a lot too.
Wishing to be present next time to give you guys an on-the-spot huge applause!!!
I read Marcus Aurelius, Meditations every night, and have for the last 2 years now. This conversation here is amazing!
I had to concentrate on every word spoken by these three gifted men...just to keep up. A true gift to the rest of us. Both Murray and Harris are brilliant. But even as an atheist, I find Peterson the most compelling....the most gifted communicator.
These men on this stage all are bearers of a purer strain of alien DNA than most of humanity. This is why they have the ability and courage to look into the void and find illumination rather than a frightening chimera. This is what is required through willpower and desire to see is that essence of what we are was never born and so will never die. An "A-Theist," (one who rejects the monotheism doctrines of theism) simply and linguistically means that they have found the concept of theism outmoded for the exceptional consciousness, while in possession of a passion to see the final truth of being is the penultimate attainment in the spiritual life. It is not negating at all. It is beyond all realms of rationalism. And no attainment can be made through rational thinking. Sunyata comes to those who has suffered so much that they become anxious to let go of the shedded snake skin that we call THE EGO, but you can never let the sacred breath escape your own lips. And to have this attainment, we must live in two worlds thereafter. One world is pure merging with the unknowable vitality of everything there is, all with their own consciousness which has now become your consciousness. The other life that must be lived simultaneously is that of the "Work-a-day world where you have a stake in outcomes, but you pursue those outcomes with a compassionate heart.
@@robertmacdonnell258 When reading the first few sentences of your comment, I was struck by the cleverness of your humor. And then...slowly...it began to dawn on me that you might be serious. But then I realized that you were really joking. Although a well written out satire it is.
@@tinfoilhatter Everyone sees the world through a different lens. And everyone thinks their lens is the only one that is clear.
@@claudes.whitacre1241 lol when reading the first of yours it was clear help on your behalf is necessary
@@robertmacdonnell258 Atheists must reject truth and all virtues as intrinsic. Is good only good when there are people to be good and others to see the good? Is beauty only in the eye of the beholder? Or is there good, evil, beauty and ugliness whether or not there is man? If so, there must be an archetype that is neither man nor even physical.
It's simply incredible to imagine a person such as JP, with all his brilliant ideas, not stumbling upon on his own ego, and instead focusing on the process of thinking rather than the pressumption "I am right, u wrong". He provides enormous amount of honesty and gives us the opportunity to explore alongside with him his ideas.
Very well laid out
You could probably thank his Father for that.
Is this a cult?
@@betitall33CZcams?
@@betitall33 No just admiration and respect.
A very helpful and intelligent debate.
It's not just the speed at which he so casually formulates an argument its also depth to which he dissects each miniscule iota of thought or issue. Absolutely astounding.
Jordan or Sam?
@@dolamordan obviously, he was the one doing the majority of the deep thinking, sometimes excessively so
@@samuelgizaw7899no that was more Sam 'obviously'
@samuelgizaw7899 - I've been an atheist for 50years and I've never had a problem with my belief because I ignore any attempt to enter my mind or affect my beliefs because they are simple, nothing to argue.
Wow great minds colliding! Kermit the Frog, Neil Patrick Harris and Ben Stiller.
This has just made this debate so much better for me.
Lmao that's a good one, better then the usual bike lock to the head and/or being shouted at and called a Nazi by communists.
I don't see nph
Jack Collins dude thats fucking funny lol
The Neil Patrick Harris one was lazy, the only thing Douglas and him have in common are the fact that they’re both gay. Other than that spot on.
I find Jordan very humble and fair as a person considering his astounding gift of insight.
You could use a strong antidote, read: The Intellectual We Deserve by Nathan Robinson. It's on the web.
Very humble when he gets angry at Sam...
B
B
LOL
Enjoyed the conversation 🙏
I've just shut down my wi-fi and watched the video on roaming. I really want to pay to watch this!
Guys, please listen to BOTH people without trying to validate what you already believe. If you agree with Peterson more, listen to Harris, if you agree with Harris more, listen to Peterson. God I am so tired of how stubborn people are in their beliefs.
By the way, if you are a true follower of Peterson then take his advice from 12 Rules. Rule 9 - "Assume that the person you are listening to might know something you don't." From what I see in these comments most of his followers are lazy in thinking and don't actually take his messages to heart.
But I think that's exactly what HAS happened though. Part of Peterson's rise is from former Sam Harris fans that did just this and realized the flaws in the argument and how much it was lacking. Almost all of their audience is overlap even before they ever met, at least before Peterson got so big. Now they tend to just fill each other's gaps, which is why I like their conversations so much.
This.
NICK..Thats a good way of handling beliefs . ITs when you find the middle line (think of a still pendulum ), can you ascend to the apex where both sides of beliefs can be acknowledged, from a position of knowing.
Well said!
No but something has got to give and it seems that Harris is losing people. I've listened to this guy enough but eventually I'm gonna come to a conclusion. The conclusion is that Harris is either willfully ignorant to Petersons challenges or he truly is limited in how he thinks which is ironic considering the slandering hes given to Petersons stance on things. Hell he gets annoyed when Peterson just attempts at coming to bring up important questions. Hes condescending. Harris is simple minded he isnt here for the same reasons Peterson is here. Peterson is interested in finding answers, interested in what Harris has to say on what he thinks and what he thinks upon what others think, and then comes to his own understandings. I dont for one second believe Harris even opens his mind to the idea of seeing things from Petersons perspective. Or even thinks much about Jordan's words as something even remotely credible when he goes home after these talks. It's spelled out completely in the way he speaks. He acts like hes an expert on everything when it comes to religion and fluffs off everything Peterson is saying, as if all of it can be answered in just a few minutes, like it's so clear cut. His answers are shallow and pander to the cliches that atheists have found themselves repeating for years.
People HAVE taken Petersons words to heart, they HAVE listened and even turned against Jordan harshly through listening to Harris on some occasions but it seems to me that Jordan keeps managing to pull people back to what hes trying to figure himself. It's his whole demeanor, the humble way he presents himself. Jordan is more willing to have a conversation, open and honest. Harris is there simply to win. And their is no value in winning for the sheer sake of it is there? I dont think their is much value in that no I dont
Jordan Peterson makes me feel like I need to practice my vocabulary 😅
Yes that is very astute
I do admire Jordan's use of words, how ever I admire Sam's to the point rationality more. Jordan has made himself a liguistic black belt to be able to reconcile his Christian worldview with reality.
He uses difficult words to say the same point he made 2 years ago
Forget vocabulary. Study the mechanisms of thought, logic, this is JPs primary strength. The words will flow from there
Peterson is truly a gift to the world. He will be long remembered as one of the greatest minds of our time on earth.
It is a gift alright...I received many idiotic gifts over my lifetime
@@LeonardLeon 👍
I feel compelled to compliment on the level of civility and eagerness to listen and learn - that the audience in London is showing here. Compare this to Harris-Peterson debate that happened in Vancouver, Canada !
P.S. I am from Canada
Peterson's "dream a crazy dream" sentiment is actually quite moving and inspiring when you think about it.
That’s Sam’s point. That’s how they get you
Screw the guy who said sam looks like ben stiller. Now i cannot unsee it
"Blue steel".
Its a truth you have always known but can now articulate. You are now enlightened
Another sheep has awoken
Yeah it really was BS
Even Sam jokes about it in a conference he did in Australia I think it was many many years ago.
Thank you gentlemen clearly articulated personal affect vs. effect.
What Murray is saying at 1:19:00, I summarise in my motto for life:
"Keep an open mind, but not so open that everything falls out".
Not EVERY new thing is good.
Not EVERY old thing is bad.
So you are saying that we shouldn't escape ideology?
I see loads of people missing the point of this conversation. This was not a competition, there is no winner or loser here. Actually there are winners, and it's us. These 2 gentlemen, who spend a big deal of time thinking about these complicated issues have showed us via amazingly well articulated dialogue, which are still the areas that need to be thought out and improved. The fact that they disagree in some fundamental ideas and the fact that they are still willing to have a civilised discussion about it , it's amazing by itself. Cheers to Jordan and Sam, we need more of this in our world.
Sam Harris is actually the one who thinks this is a competition so in the way Sam Harris lost this battle long ago and Jordan B Peterson is actually the one who's trying to find truth.
Jordan beat his ass
I was priveleged to attend the Dublin event. My wife attended with me and I sat beside a nice fella who had flown from Italy to attend. It was fascinating. This year my wonderful wife is giving me two of Douglas' books for Christmas and Jordan's new book for my birthday.
She is a keeper!
This comment made me happy.
😂😂😂😂
Not Jordan for Christmas, eh? Hm.
I'm glad I found this
Truly fine piece of discussion gentlemen....
A point relevant to Jordan Peterson's "Auschwitz guard" story. My father was a teenager during the nazi occupation of Athens, and he was telling me that one of the most chilling experiences he had, was of an SS officer kicking an obviously very ill, starving man who was lying on the pavement. It was chilling because there was nothing evil about his face: he was a handsome man, with a smile of innocent joy during all this. He was genuinely having innocent fun, in his mind. And it is so chilling because it is so far removed from our established experience of acts of good and evil. A criminal who looks like one and speaks like one, you can deal with. A man like this, that looks like the guy next door, and is not conscious of the pure evil he embodies, is much harder to come to grips with.
The mundanity of evil. It's the worst aspect. Because it brings us all a hairs breadth from being evil ourselves. And since we could never be the "evil" evil, we won't look at that. It's the problem with the woke, they are so sure they are the good guys, so sure they are a million miles away from the bad guys. History doesn't support that view.
Thanks for the story. Indeed that is chilling.
If there's one thing that humans can understand more than any other species on Earth is to understand the suffering of another human. When you don't see another person as a human being you can do atrocious things to that person without batting an eyelid.
Without a solid, compelling moral structure the human being can revert to "evil" yet unseen.
This is why external appearance is irrelevant and we rely on the ability to see a person's soul/feel their energy. I would say over history, the most beautiful people are the most wicked. Because they think they can be, and they are often elevated by weaker people around them.
Even after four discussions Harris still spent way too much time projecting his assumptions of Peterson's religious beliefs onto Peterson. Rather than, acknowledging Peterson's position is not that of a "typical" religious person, and then working together to hash through the real stuff Peterson alluded to each time, but was never really able to get to. You'd feel Peterson trying to go there and Harris would interrupt saying it was "changing the rules." Meaning he's still not comfortable with thinking about Peterson's ideas as they don't come from that of a "typical" Christian. Hence one of the reasons we're all watching.
There's so much more to dig into. I'd love to see it.
Yep. Harris's fundamental view of religious people seems to be that they are simply ignorant of the truth and holding onto dogma as an alternative, however Jordan Peterson has more of a scientific mind and is simply emphasizing the importance of religion (or more importantly, the danger of a lack of religion.)
Sam just wants JP to say he believes in the arguments that he can already "dismantle" for his choir.
I get the impression harris is attacking petersons belief system and wanting him to be wrong, rather than voicing out his own personal positions
@@davidnorman2134 Agreed.
Harris (and Dawkins) are very dogmatic in their dislike of dogmatism!
Sam is far too preoccupied with defeating "Religion" as if it's some clearly defined entity. First, it's not that simple, and 2nd it's a waste of mental resources. I find his preoccupation to be telling. So, I become more interested in the source of his animosity.
Right?... I've been thinking this of Sam Harris for years now.
So true, I find that he has much to offer but every time he starts beefing on religion I get suspicious. And I'm non religious.
His main concern is around unjustified belief (dogma) as he is concerned about the link between belief and behaviour. Religion is an area of dogma he focuses on as it is the only one (although now questionable) that gives succour in the form of virtue to dogma.
@@davidgraham8058 That's understood, and a legitimate concern, but it's pretty one-dimensional, trite even...
Telling of what?
This is such a great debate. Don't discount what Douglas and Jordan have said here. The Nihilism is what dominated the late 1800s leading up to WWI and WWII. (USSR AND Germany) wanted to replace Christianity with their own false ideas and false beliefs. They believed in cultish pagan beliefs in the SS which included Christian SS officers just think about that. They basically became like their barbarian ancestors and imposed new dogmas and built a new church called "Deutsch Christianity." There is indeed value in remaining genuinely Christian in the way Jordan describes.
On an completely unrelated note: Where can i get those chairs?!
Roel Takken it's Chesterfield offer Pair Queen Anne! They look so comfy
Ράντικαλ Σέντριστ ha! The dark side....
Ikea
Frankfurt School.
Liquidation centers.
It's so nice to see Dr. Peterson laughing and genuinely loving having such an intellectual argument, rather than debating with idiots that just wanna paint a picture against him.
---Yes Jordan was trounced and couldn't steam-roll non-intellectuals. It was nice to see Jordan "semi-humbled"
I agree. And to be honest, he got absolutely demolished by Sam.
@@OctoBox Trounced? Lol you know nothing
@@MizzouRah78 What’s rational about reality?
@EARTH I'm sorry that you can't accept or conceptualize that Jordan got outclassed. Your question is neither relevant or thought provoking.
Very enlightening. All great points.
Great conversation! Smart people disagreeing! It's great.
There is only one way to settle this beef... Diss tracks.
Sam needs a reboot to the head!
Sam Harris: "To be fair to the present, most music, most art, and most architecture is no longer religious."
Best argument for religion I've ever heard
sichalmers92 I thought the exact same thing haha
sichalmers92 his point is it still exists ...
I really don't see what's the big deal about Harris, I've had better conversations with philosophy professors. Jordan is clearly way beyond his level. His arguments seem to be reached by confirmation bias and nothing else. You can see that he doesn't put much effort into thinking whatever he's talking about.
@
dagem abebe
Rather than religious, I would say that there's a certain "spirituality" about those things. Jordan usually mentions the weirdness about people going to museums and looking at paintings, I had also thought about that before. I think if you begin to question why do we feel attraction to, for example, music; what makes some sounds better than others, the same with paintings, you see that there's no obvious reason why that is.
After thinking about it for quite a while, I think that the main commonality among those apparently irrational attractions is harmony. We have a preconfigured attraction for harmony in colors, sounds, and shapes. The more complex and sophisticated that harmony is, the stronger is the tendency to generate that attraction; you can see that with thousands of people watching a person play an instrument, for example. But why we have that propensity and from where the artists take it from is a mystery.
@@Fedetk I agree totally. Harris is overrated as hell
@dagem abebe The arts in recent, modern times, have been very regressive as of late. Almost in one to one coordination to how fewer people are inspired by God in their lives. At the very least it shows the degenerative inspirations that arise out of a mindset that seeks to be ABSENT from God. And thats why our music and movie industry have been increasingly shit
Thank you for this, Dr. Peterson.
I’m not gonna lie,I liked when Jordan called out the audience. I felt like he called me out too.
Dokkasan 1:07:00 Start here. He goes OFFFFFFF, It’s beautiful.
This shows weakness democracy
I love how Harris thinks it's an evasion too.
I thought all that was theater in order to avoid whether or not he actually, literally believes in God. As was the way, in which right after that, he took control of the direction in which the conversation was going, and the new direction into which he threw it, was away from him having to answer that question.
@Richard Muenzer and Mr. Espriella I make this reply to both of you not as a criticism in any way. Mr. Peterson does not give a yes no reply about whether he "believes God exists", and states he lives as if God exists. So it may seem like he is being evasive, but I would like to offer my understanding to the both of you. I do not believe that anyone has direct evidence of the existence of God. Even people that profess a belief in the existence of God. People that believe in the existence of God believe that by being maximally inclusive of all evidence that it is overwhelmingly dishonest to claim that God does not exist. The evidence is so convincing that they claim with honesty that they believe that God exists. It is their personal perspective of God's nature. However, personal perspectives of God's nature differ as everyone knows. So it is not a simple matter to ask someone if they believe in your personal perception of what you understand as the definition of God. Perhaps insight into what I am explaining can be found in learning that discuss that intractable relationship between humbleness and understanding. Mr. Peterson is extraordinarily consistent in this as he highlights his humble approach to daring questions of definitive conclusion of God's existence. Instead he opts to maintain honesty above all and cautiously warns of any person recklessly claiming a universal understanding of the nature and existence of God. So he allows the evidence to guide him, and thus far it overwhelmingly inspires him to live as though God exists.
This seems more practical than the whole of politics
agree
Yeah! Instead it consists of powerhungry, corrupt dickheads.
@@Fnelrbnef politics is important
@@yushpi Yeah..it just should be done right.
@@Fnelrbnef how
1:49:00 not only a very powerfull perspective to consider but such a brave and vulnerable thing to reveal.
Great talk, I did have to keep going back and forth to ChatGPT to have a bunch of words explained, however, and several book references summarised 😅. I'm getting a pounding headache.
51:10 mark, "When your doctrine demolishes an [ethos], leaving nothing behind...something will rush in to fill the void." Brilliant point.
That is one of the reasons why they talked past each other. I think that Harris is against dogmas, because you can't question them(which leads to numerous problems, he said it in the other video). While Peterson only talks about teachings itself.
We can demolish dogmatic teachings without any repercussions.
Fair point on dogmas. So once a dogmatic teaching has been demolished what would you "prefer" takes it place? Send your response to austinajames7@gmail.com so I can be notified quicker if you respond to my question
@@Apol-los No need for gmail. Answer is short. Any teaching can replace dogma. That is because dogmatic teachings forbids critical thinking, questioning(they tend to not change with time or facts) while any other teachings, they change given new information.
Example, dogmatic teachings : any religion. Non dogmatic teachings: laws, set of beliefs based on evidence or anything like that.
I understand your distinction but what have you personally chosen to replace dogmatic teachings with?
@@Apol-los I didn't really have any dogmatic teachings. In my country religion is more of a cultural thing. And my basic beliefs constantly changes with new information I have.
Set of beliefs that I live by are custom ones, I didn't really took them from anywhere, so I can't give good example that would fit for everyone.
But partly good example is law, or anything based on evidence.
I can't explain why but it always seems like Jordan is trying to find out the truth (through discussion) whereas Sam wants to win an argument.
I was going to agree, but being generous i would say that i'm not sure that Sam isn't open to finding out the truth. In his numerous books he has explored these topics deeply, and i don't think that that comes from only wanting to win the discussion. He has been pursuing the truth and it has led him to agree with Peterson on a lot of what he has had to say.
richardrandomk he’s just a petulant child! One who knows he’s peddling nonsense!
Through reading Iain McGilchrist’s work I got to understand that this is a matter of right brain dominance vs left brain dominance. The right hemisphere deals with the unknown. The left deals with the known. The right hemisphere is about seeking possibilities, the left about predictability.
The fact that you cannot explain why makes it clear to me your bias for taking Jordans side instead of listening to both of them objectively. Take a step back and revaluate your observation because it is not true. Both are after the truth.
Arcrer when I say 'it seems'. doesn't that include enough lack of certainty on my part? why is it clear to you that I am bias?
as an agnostic, I wish every religious person was like Dr. Jordan peterson, he is a brilliant man! sam harris is also a wonderful scientist who helped me a lot in the past to find the evil camouflaged in the religion I subscribed to in the past.
I know I could be wrong but God is number one to me. I really appreciate religious, agnostic and atheist speakers who discuss topics respectfully. Most of my loved ones don't believe as I do but all of them love me back. I hope we can all remain free to express ourselves civilly.
Of the the truth. You have raised I have no voice. May the God you serve give you the blessing
Yup, having watched all eight hours now I think I can safely say that Jordan is genuinely seeking to understand while Sam is seeking to persuade.
I see it the opposite way, therefore I guess you're religious? Haha
Completely Agree with you Michael Edwards
Sam Harris is simply under the delusion that he's right, and he's not.
JP is clearly arguing for the value of religion, where Sam is arguing it is unnecessary. They both clearly hear each others arguments. Neither is being dismissive of each other.
Some of JP's premises are also false, and to my disbelief, Sam agreed with them. Although I'm pleased Sam corrected his incorrect definition of atheism.
agreed!