An Atheist in the Realm of Myth | Stephen Fry | EP 169
Vložit
- čas přidán 16. 05. 2021
- On this episode of the Jordan B Peterson Podcast, I am joined by Stephen Fry. Stephen Fry is a noted British actor, writer, comedian, political figure, journalist, poet, intellectual and much more. You may have seen him in the films Chariots of Fire, A Fish Called Wanda, The Life and Death of Peter Sellers, V for Vendetta, Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, and The Hobbit film series. He’s also served as the president of a mental health charity. Stephen’s list of accomplishments is far too long to list here.
Stephen and I discussed a variety of topics in the realm of drama, literature, and politics. We also discuss among other topics, atheism, religion, rationalism, empiricism, myth/story, bartering with reality, Greek mythology, Egyptian mythology, resentment, cruelty in the world, constitutional monarchy versus a democratic republic, and much more.
Find more of Stephen Fry on Twitter @stephenfry, his website stephenfry.com, check IMDB for his many movie and television appearances, and his many books.
This episode was recorded on March 28th, 2021.
// SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL //
Newsletter: linktr.ee/DrJordanBPeterson
Donations: www.jordanbpeterson.com/donate
// COURSES //
Discovering Personality: jordanbpeterson.com/personality
Self Authoring Suite: selfauthoring.com/
Understand Myself (personality test): understandmyself.com/
// BOOKS //
Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life: jordanbpeterson.com/Beyond-Order
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/
Events: jordanbpeterson.com/events/
Blog: jordanbpeterson.com/blog/
Podcast: jordanbpeterson.com/podcast/
Reading List: jordanbpeterson.com/great-books/
Merchandise: teespring.com/stores/jordanbp...
// SOCIAL //
Twitter: / jordanbpeterson
Instagram: / jordan.b.peterson
Facebook: / drjordanpeterson
// SPONSORS //
For Advertising Inquiries, visit www.advertisecast.com/TheJord...
![Eminem - Houdini [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/22tVWwmTie8/mqdefault.jpg)
Shownotes:
[0:18] Jordan Peterson introduces the episode's guest Stephen Fry whose list of titles and accomplishments is quite astonishing.
[1:33] Stephen starts the show with concerns over the culture wars that seem to be dividing the western world and alienating people from one another
[4:30] Jordan talks about his public reputation for pointing out the excesses of the radical political left in western culture leading back into the discussion of the importance of maintaining free speech. Stephen believes that the moderate left is almost and repulsive to the extreme left and their obvious opponents the far right are at this point. It's become very unfashionable to be a moderate of any type.
[11:00] Jordan directs discussion toward the role Stephen Fry had to play in the atheist movement. Stephen outlines his alignment with Empiricism more than Rationalism when looking at the world and it's problems.
[16:00] Examining the strange way that Empiricism doesn't always need a rational answer to function effectively.
[21:00] The truths found in literature, fiction, drama, movies, and general narrative that we find so compelling even though we don't necessarily understand why? Stephen uses some examples from egyptian and greek mythology to show how narrative has been passing truth from one generation far before writing and science (science is still just catching up).
[30:00] Jordan brings Stephen back to the question of why he feels his perspective differs from his atheist friend Richard Dawkins. Highlighting the incredible human capacity for wonder.
[34:00] Jordan and Stephen examining the learning process of humankind using sacrifice to obtain some future good
[44:00] Is the corruption of the christian church intrinsic in the philosophy or the people who follow the religion? When looking at all traditions, where do you draw the line on the good intention of what the tradition represents and the people who corrupted that vision?
[53:00] Jordan brings up the novel the Brothers Karamazov that Stephen quotes concerning the injustice inherent with the possibility of a God who created a world with so much suffering and injustice in it. Jordan postures that resentment of such a being does not seem to have any functional utility?
[1:01:00] The argument of a higher mode of being. looking at the development of morality in children through playing games, examining other behavioral science in humans, rats, mice, and other species..
[1:11:30] Back to the distinction between Stephen Fry and Richard Dawkins from Jordans perspective. Jordan expresses the creative artistic domain is more unique when regarding atheists. Stephen points to the importance of things that convey truth that are not strictly rational. The two discuss the functionality and rational absurdity of a constitutional monarchy form of government.
[1:19:00] Talking about the "gods within" and how different religions and thinkers have tried to solve the puzzle of what some call conscience?
[1:32:00] Stephen tells one last tale emphasizing his point that story/drama/narative are some of the most powerful ways to bring people together and should not be trivialised when discussing serious topics in societies.
[1:37:00] Wrapping up the show. Thanking the guest Stephen Fry for his participation.
Thanks for all you do for us Jordan
Thank you so much !!
This is amazingly helpful. Standing ovation to whoever puts these summaries together!
Thank you, Doctor.
Thank you, Jordan. We're still here and still listening -- as intently as ever.
“It’s a strange paradox, that the liberals are illiberal in their demand for liberality. They are exclusive in their demand for inclusivity. They are homogenous in their demand for heterogeneity. They are somehow un-diverse in their call for diversity - you can be diverse, but not diverse in your opinions and in your language and in your behaviour. And that’s a terrible pity." Stephen Fry. Thank you for being you.
Sounds a lot like Chesterton.
@@aarellanod2d That would be deliberate. It was a hell of a denouement in that Munk debate. That and the refrain to 'let doubt rule'.
The intolerance of tolerance is incoherent.
I think the key word here is "exclusive in their demand for liberality". Not all are like that though and it's but a handful that really are that way. Most liberals don't promote exclusivity but there is the paradox of tolerance (being tolerant of the intolerant). That's a whole other thing in and off itself. I doubt Fry would be tolerant of religious leaders calling for the death of homosexuals.
*_Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. - In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal._*
~ Karl Popper, 1945
Just an idea for the production crew for this podcast. It would be great to have a split screen so we could see the body language of the person being spoken to. I think it would really enhance the depth of understanding in the audience.
Disagree think it is too much going on we should be focusing on the speaker. Though during the debates it would switch from 1 to both at times which was good. Not sure how reactions would be different online split screen compared to in the moment reactions.
Agree, hearing the speaker and watching the listening is an entirely important part of the language of communication.
I thought so too johnnycorvo, well said
@@4_times_college_dropout_tr24 Having the ability to see two people's faces while one of them is speaking is too much going on for you? Perhaps you should sit these discussions out altogether.
I disagree, and would even say - shut down the damn video. Their words are more than enough. Both Stepehen Fry who is an immensely gifted narrator, and J. Peterson with his emotions - real and deep - bursting out of his voice. This is not a reality show, but rather - a learned discussion.
Two extremely intelligent people. Respecting each others views and allowing each other to get points across.
Yea, mutual respect? Naw, that'll never work..😂
‘A stupid person’s idea of what an intelligent person is like’ - Julie Burchill on Fry.
@@kvdp9543 "A stupid person's idea of an influential person to quote" - reasonable person on Julie Burchill
@@Declan398 well if influence is what matters more than truth then do follow Fry. You won't go wrong.
I only saw one.
I'm loving this: two intelligent men with different point of views arguing their different points without ever looking down at the other, or the other's beliefs. We need more conversations like this.
Funny how you state "arguing" I found them agreeing a lot
@@JWB86 I think the agreement was more of a “I understand what you are saying” instead of “I agree with your point”
This is what a real Debate looks like. And they are indeed arguing when you define Argument correctly: a reason or set of reasons given with the aim of persuading others that an action or idea is right or wrong.
This is the normal,the commun sense. Agree to desagree..But now days is all about how special we are, how is OK to have 100kg and no think about your health, is about butterfly..
That’s because Stephen Fry is a man, and so Jordan Peterson is respectful. Have you seen JP talking about women?
One man wakes you with the power of his words, the other enthralls you with beauty of his speech. Both leave you smarter, and perhaps even a little bit happier. This is a treat.
@@seanleith5312 although its very clear that you're a smart person, and one who knows their shit - i worry you've spent too much of your time focused on the wrong bits. there is so much good in the world, and especially since all the people and times that you mentioned. there is no better time to be alive (for anyone in history, infact) than now, because the future is uncertain and the past unchangeable. your outlook seems dismal, and you seem far too bright to be stuck within it. i hope you are able to see there are far more positive things that came from people like orwell than negative, like provoking critical think in people like fry and peterson.
i wish you the best, friend
@@seanleith5312 liberals remove structure and functionality
@@curtisboyce3849 Well Done Sir.
@@satoshinakamoto7253 And the heads of monarchs and tyrants.
Wow. Beautifully put. I wholeheartedly agree!
The Peterson / Fry discussions should be a monthly series for at least twelve sessions.
I would suggest monthly discussions for the remainder of both of their lives! ;)
“Twelve sessions for life”
Well, Fry could certainly enlighten us for a bit longer than that. I'm afraid however that Jordan was scrambling to repeat himself over and over for the last hour or so of this conversation. His conservative side has stunted his ability to see solutions outside his circle of thought. I could listen to Fry for hours since he has knowledge to impart. Jordan not so much😏
@@pseudonayme7717 What you witness there I believe is the 140 iq to 170 difference and therein how each approaches altering humanity. That said, many won't understand the higher of the two, so conversations and guiding of the intermediaries is a huge benefit to the world.
@@pseudonayme7717 Peterson is in the top 2 percent of most quoted scientists in the world, in his domain. So he has knowledge to share
Such an amazing discussion. No harsh words, no aspiration of "winning". Just great minds talking, exchanging ideas and knowledge. ♥️
A real, honest-to-goodness Debate. >.< The winner is the Truth and Understanding, not either of the individuals in the discussion/argument.
Well I did find Jordan Peterson's views to be quite basic and childish honestly. A bit of a "pretend" intellectual.
@@nonefvnfvnjnjnjevjenjvonej3384 You can think that if you like, you'd be disagreeing with Stephen Fry... who rather likes Peterson as a fellow Academic.
@@zephodb well he is kinder than me :D
@@zephodb You don't get it, he is an edgy boi trying to get attention online.
Both Fry and Peterson, different as they may be, have had a significant impact on me and my thinking. And I just love how they can talk, unpack each other’s ideas, challenge each other and enjoy it whilst doing so.
I reckon it’s time for part 2 😋
Civilized debate.
mee eens!!!
Why? Fry is an intellectual and Peterson is a charlatan who tries to pass himself off a an intellectual
@Blind Watchmaker Do you live in Holland?
Same here. Inspirational, an invitation to knowledge from different sides. Love it
This conversation should continue as a monthly podcast.... I could listen to their mental jiu-jitsu without ceasing.
I just made the same comment it should be monthly 🤞
I wonder if they've tried DMT.
@@furrycannon Is that you Joe?
Absolutely!!!
Yes, 100%! Stephen Fry is incredibly brilliant, and paired with Jordan Peterson, it's intellectual gold.
A bit of Fry and Peterson is the new buddy bromance show that we need
God yes, please, make it happen! 😍
Been watching Jeeves and Wooster of late, great show
I'd like to see Hugh Laurie on this podcast as well. Though i have no idea whether he delves into either politics or psychology or not
@@Tricolorrr533 That would be really interesting. Hugh Laurie doesn't seem to do many deep dive interviews, but Jordan would be the perfect person to do it
Conversations in heaven? Would they be similar? A constructive exchange of thoughts is ultimately constructive.
I'm retiring next month. And I'm a
bit nervous about how to keep up
with my kids.
You can venture into crypto
trading… and make money. The
good thing is. You just need a
broker to help you. I'm in and I'm
making good money.
please what do you mean by trade?
Crypto trading is a digital currency
investment that can bring you good
profits over time. I would
recommend Val J Smith to a real
estate agent
I think I came across this name Val J
Smith on my way to work on the
billboards and as to his
effectiveness how can he be
contacted please?
✅ Val J Smith ii
The world desperately needs more Stephen Fry's in it. Intellectual and well read enough to converse properly with experts in their fields, combined with the rare ability to not only pass the information on to the masses in way that doesn't make them feel small and stupid, but to also then think and wonder about it themselves after he is gone
It's his genuine interest in things that makes them interesting to others.
I think of him as a wonderful teacher in communication.
Na look at him pig in and out
Peterson too. He's open minded, fair, vulnerable, careful with his words though they are complex, amd he never attacks people's character. They are both quality human beings.
@@braindeadjester I do agree with Peterson more on most matters but Stephen Fry is a noticeably better communicator in my opinion, at least in a General mass vocabulary sense which makes him more 'understandable?' I guess, but who knows it might be just his fun accent.
Two men came to talk to each other. Both poor souls because of facing depression, but also both rich souls for their contributions to the world.
A wonderful talk
Nicely put.
Agreed. I asked the universe for this 🙏
@@luluadapa5222 and the Universe did not care in the slightest, and yet , it happened. Awesome, isn`t it ? :)
Have a great day.
@@luluadapa5222 If you're asking the universe for help, you're missing one of the major points these two men are making.
Firstly, Professor Petersen, it is wonderful to see you back and in better health. Secondly, thank you for bringing us this conversation between two intellectual titans, you and Mr Fry. Humbling, encouraging and inspiring.
If I could sit in a pub and simply listen to two people have a conversation, it would be these two.
Maybe followed closely by CS Lewis and Tolkien
If you invite then, I'll get the pints in. I think we're gonna need more crisps
If I could listen to a podcast. It would be this one.
Very deep.
nope. one of them would have to be my father.
@@pushthetempo2 I’ll bring a multipack......and peanuts.
To be able to live in an age where you can watch two men with such talents converse on a screen almost freely! What an inspirational conversation! Thank you Jordan Peterson and Stephen Fry
Because they do not believe themselves to be better than the other just different and they are trying to find common ground as well as persuade. Most people are unable to achieve this level of discourse because they aren't willing to listen or learn from anyone who may have a differing point of view or who may challenge them.
Never really been a fan of Peterson, I think this turned up in my feed because of JRE and my lifelong fanship of Steven Fry. I have to say this conversation is a perfect example of how a basic level of respect for other people can lead to something great and illuminating. The fact these two did this is fantastic and it's an example to be followed.
💯 😊❤
I think too that he his an overated intellectual who hides behind long convoluted "word salads" that express feeble ideas that could be said in one sentence.
Aristotolian ecclisiasticism, only this man could talk on or above the level of Jordan. this man Fry seems to be the V, full of shocking historical facts.
@@RammYou2 I could sit down for a drink with Fry...JLP not so much
Fry is fantastic. Was this conversation that made a fan of Fry.
Do you have other suggestions from him that shows his immense intellect?
This isn't so much a debate as a respectful conversation -- and it's one of the best things I've ever seen on the Internet. Many thanks to Jordan Peterson and Stephen Fry for making it available to us.
if it was a debate Stephen takes this one imo
then you need to get around the net more...both of them manage to miss the true deeper meaning of the sacrificed Sun God myth and its complex conflation with the life of Jesus.. this is pretty fundamental... and Jordan bangs yet again on his drum concerning what sacrifice really means... all very predictable, all very questionable... And by the way, we gave up sacrificing humans aeons ago? Did we? Are you sure.. We're sacrificing children right now, day in day out
@@simonlee8889 True, sacrifices of young virgins has been going on since the beginning of worship. now anything we question not written in Wikipedia is considered a conspiracy theory. The past 5 years in America we have seen the power of the Digital Town square. We can't question mainstream science without being censored which completely goes against Scientific research. I hate politics but seeing our former POTUS tongue cut out theoretically is something I NEVER could have predicted so soon. Actually makes me want to listen more when the elite are that nervous
The interplay of consciousness, thus conscious, as done by the power of our imagination to give us a view of ever changing truths
@@christianhadden6720 in fairness, the debate was one (Peterson) creating argument to encourage and enhance conversation and discussion to which a response was given. This is Peterson's channel after all and he is the interviewer.
Stephen Fry could narrate my murder, as it happened, and I'd still be enthralled.
Labour supporter since he could vote.
Labour “the party of the people”. Hahahaha.
People who own an oyster fork.
Really. I don't own an oyster fork, but I believe that feeling superior to someone who does would be self-delusional.
Same goes for Attenborough
I would be even more terrified tbh
Would that make accepting ur own murder difficult? Actually No...Super Easy...
I just bought his Greek myth book the other day it’s a fantastic read.
Stephen is one heck of a talented man,and yes he is a national treasure who deserves to be knighted.
I think Jordan forgot calling him a philospher
Such is the high regard Stephen is held in I suspect he has been offered royal recognition...OBE, MBE, knighthood, but he will have declined.
@@RainwaterAquarium Certainly so in the case of the accolade (knighthood). Twice,in fact. He said it would be like being forced to wear a suit ALL the time. Incidentally, Bowie refused too. Sir Elton, however... (actually Sir Reg).
Some how I think he would gratefully decline a knight hood
@@justinhakaraia9264 The word is "gracefully",and "knighthood"is one word. Always ready to help!
JP is a rock. And Stephen Fry is the weather, the right kind. I saw JP being shaped up in this discourse. JP was so close to tears, and he has shown his vulnerabilities several times but this it the only time when he did that when the other person agrees with him. Hats of to JP and Stephen Fry. Everyone is a little wiser after watching this, JP, Fry, me, and you.
This needs to be a full series. This is pure gold. Thank you, Jordan and Stephen.
I absolutely agree. This is the conversation we need.
This is pure Alchemy personified.
Absolutely support this comment, we need more of these!
Can u imagine 🤤🤤🤤
I'd watch the shit out of that.
I can’t believe how great Jordan is looking now. So good to have him back
Amen to that
Yes, he looks good and healthy. But I can see in his eyes that he's still struggling. I hope he continues his positive progression. He's a real treasure for humanity and reason.
@@Republic3D wonder if he's been experimenting with medicinal mushrooms... that would give him that look
The beard is always making him look 5 years younger :D
But yeah his skin tone looks better as well
With everyone using there home office we are seeing men with no makeup and women looking more like Ronald McDonald, Mr Jordan looks well. No makeup but some sun.
I think what I enjoyed the most about this episode was witnessing how undoubtedly knowledgable Stephen is on the subject of faith, religion and it's deeply embedded roots within human history allowing him to deliver facts and researched backed counter points instead of two toddlers not getting along.
Stephen at a glance seems to have made an incredibly informed decision on his beliefs based on his own knowledge rather than what "others have told him" to believe. I guess I'm writing this right now because it was refreshing to see an athiest point of view with substance where both sides were respectful, intelligent and no one was screaming over one another to be "right" or "louder" for once!
I couldn't agree more. There's a reason why he's a national treasure. I'm a big fan of both of these gentlemen and it was such a healthy (and as a result fruitful) conversation. Too often the algorithms promote echo chamber videos. Even if I agree with them, it doesn't nourish me quite like conversations such as this.
@@haydentrudgill o
1
it is very refreshing to listen to. had no idea stephen was a lvl 1000 atheist😂
The strange thing is Jordan Peterson is an atheist. Always has been, always will be. But in his eyes, he wants to help people, and telling them that their gOD doesn't exist serves him well....and gets him off the hook with bible bashers. He literally expands the publics love affair with him by including the religious and the non religious. I love him too, until he wanders into the truth of gOD.....then I tire of him. Fry addresses this to the point where Jordan is edging on admitting this. Since this interview he has admitted that there is no gOD.....and now he's admitted that I respect him more.
Two intellectual Behemoths...MUST see more of these two together ..Can listen to them for hours.
well.. one is ... the other looks like might start crying at any moment..
@@nonefvnfvnjnjnjevjenjvonej3384 So what?
@@bokunoremon pseudo intellectual
@@nonefvnfvnjnjnjevjenjvonej3384 Because he might start crying at any moment?
@@bokunoremon no because he is a pseudo intellectual who is an addict and is mentally unstable?
I wish this a 15 hour episode, I can listen to these two talking forever.
zug zug
Peterson and Bret Weinstein too
@@brando3342 this is rather obnoxious.
@@brando3342 Exactly. I actually agree with you completely. Would there have been more time, perhaps they could have danced longer with each topic.
I apologize for sounding rude.
@@brando3342 While I can see your point to a degree, as was noted in one area of the comments, this was primarily an interview conducted by Dr. Peterson more so than an actual debate. Second, it seems to be in regard to the human experience in terms of a sociological understanding rather than merely a discourse of matters of faith and their influence (for better or worse) from the religious institutions created by humans.
Please, please have a follow-up discussion. This was everything I had hoped it would be, and more.
Do it. Do it.
Yes please!!
Absolutely... I’m a junky wanting to hear more of this conversation between these two. I could listen for hours...occasionally rewinding because WTF ! 🤯 . Put them both in the same place....Some old university library setting, sitting in comfy high backed leather chairs, drinking fine whiskey....and conversing, for HOURS on almost anything...Hell, I’d read the back of a bottle of Windex to them and say, “ Ok, Go ! “ and then an hour later I’m understanding Windex in ways I never imagined nor ever wanted to but here I am and hey...btw....pass that over here 👈, Bogart ! 😎
De acord 💪
When a conversation can hold my attention for an hour and thirty eight minutes it has to be special indeed. Thank you to both these gentlemen for allowing us the pleasure of intelligent conversation with little argument. A breath of fresh air in a stagnant world.
The time just sped by, didn't it? I couldn't believe I'd listened to this for over one and a half hours without my attention or energy flagging, because of course, THEIRS didn't; and they were generous to each other in allowing time for arguments to be made and considered. We really need more of this.
I marvelled at how they never became angry or annoyed by each other views. Indeed, they seemed to revel in the prospect of the meeting of minds. Respect to both who I admire greatly.
Agreed. There is a level of respect between the two and precisely as it should be.
I knew this was gonna be great the minute Fry explained why he agreed to do this.Pretty much the same reason I follow both men,extremes are bad.
“It makes me resentful and angry and wanting to shake my fist, but I found upon intense consideration that there was nothing in that, that didn’t make it worse and that therefore it must be wrong even though it’s justifiable”. I hope I can remember and share this often.
Yeah that sentence hit me to. Marvelous conversation.
Resentment is often short-sighted. How often in our later lives do we come to understand the lesson taught to us by imperfect parents who allowed us to go through struggle and trial? We find that the struggles prepared us for the greater weight of adulthood.
So then, if there is a God, one who can love perfectly, why would we assume that the evil in the world isn't meant for the loving purpose of preparing us for something greater? Resentment towards deity over our pitiful existence stems from not knowing the outcomes of the struggle.
@@ralphengland8559 I sincerely love this reply!!
@@streglof thank you. I hope it's a useful perspective.
@@ralphengland8559 pretty smart view
Stephen Fry remembers so many facts and quotes then explains them so eloquently… His mind is simply amazing.
Fact: He is blessed with a photographic memory.
And yes, what makes him amazing, is that he uses his photographic memory to pull some stories and puzzles together, then explaining it in a way that simple people like me can understand.
@@kobusg7460 photogenic...?
@@isabel0852 Thanks, fixed. Proof that (a) English is not my first language, and (b) I am not blessed with a photographic memory myself :-)
Isabel “eidetic” ...
Kobus G don’t ever sell your self short. A simple google search would suffice most times. Photogenic, is used for People; faces that look aesthetically pleasing. Specially when their photos are shot or they happened to be filmed.
Your use of photographic memory was indeed correct, however, a more pronounced term is eidetic memory.
I'm thankful to be able to enjoy this conversation
Wow, the last thing Stephen Fry said really struck me. There is no level of articulation that is more convincing to a human being than a good story.
When "long-form" discussion feels painfully short
my thoughts exactly.
Man. This conversation makes me feel like I am witnessing human mental evolution in real-time. Two conflicting perspectives from mutually great intellects, discussing their opposing ideas in a healthy, respectful & civil manner, is the recipe for progress in exploring the unknown of what’s next to come in human civilization. Very exciting to listen to these.
Indeed. I have to admit I think I share a lot more ideas with Fry but absolutely acknowledge most of Peterston points (not just here I've actually seen tons of his videos although I haven't read anything from him) as valid and more than that essential. This whole discussion makes me think how likely it is that all the other times opposing views clash they are at such a distance of this level of discussion and precision that people end up being frustrated and start offending 'the other side'. We all much evolve so much...
Yes it was such a gift to see these two brilliant people explore life.
I do agree!
Would have loved to 'chip in', just a couple of times.
Once to quote Galatians chapter 5 verses 22 and 23, where we get a clear picture - especially as we can see this in others - of the higher moral or ethical future we could aim at.
Aspects of character and motivation; 'love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self control'.
holy shit the mario kart lick guy
there is no god. watch revalation of the pyramids. then viper tv. enki..
Randomly watched this out of curiosity and couldn't switch it off, completely gripped. It left my brain hurting just a little but certainly worth it
I could listen to Stephen Fry forever. One of the most interesting people of all time. 🦋
The best thing about this was the places you disagreed but were willing to explore in civilized manner. It felt at the end that both of you got someting out of it and so did we all who listened.
Tā tas ir, jā.
Didn't seem like Fry was willing to budge on anything, he almost arrogantly dismissed all of Peterson's arguments. There seems to be a component of atheism that is so arrogant that makes one to reflexively dismissive to anything that even comes from a religious place, regardless of whether or not it has value.
@@brucelivingston2220 - why arrogance, when one is curious and listens ?
@@brucelivingston2220 I think more than arrogance this is a lingering result of Henry VIII's split from the Vatican and how it seemingly permanently made Brits suspicious of anything valuable that comes from religion in general.
Once bitten twice shy so to speak.
@@brucelivingston2220 oh yeah? What component? I am an atheist but am very much interested in religious thinking. And it’s the same case with all of my atheist friends.
It’s the opposite if anything. People claiming that they’re special, that the whole universe was built with them in mind. What’s more arrogant than that?
I think he dismissed it because the same narrative can be applied to almost any mythical or fictional idea. In fact, I think that’s exactly what he meant. The thing about Jordan’s interpretation is that: it reflects human nature, not divine nature. And even he knows that, that’s why he compares the Bible stories with other versions from different civilizations.
Stephen Fry is quite simply astonishing to me. He brings so much warmth and humanity to subjects that are very complicated to me.
He is an absolute gem of a human being
@@psychcowboy1 I understood clearly what Steven Fry said, I have no idea what you’re on about.
@@psychcowboy1 is fry and intellectual seems like a bizarre question. He's certainly done his homework through out life. Not everyone will be your cup of tea kid doesn't make them any less.
have you watched the movie "V for Vendetta"?
Highly recommend.
@@psychcowboy1 I think your question is wether something intellectual was said, since you ask for that multiple times. I think so, since intellect is defined by the objective understanding and abilty to reason about subjects and abstract subjects. Fry does this on multiple occasions, linking multiple facts together (showing an excelent understanding of many things such as how words came to be that we now use every day, or how tiny religious/ mythological facts still affect how we talk and think today) that many people would not have seen are connected, thereby showing, e.g., their origin, or what they mean to our society as it stands. So, in this way he is showing his intellect, not because we find it interesting or very smart, but because it is actually adhering to the description of what being an intellectual means. I don't see how you cannot see that.
Moreover, it sounds like you didn't like something he said and are, therefore, trying to prove that he is not an intellectual, such that he doesn't get the audience he clearly deserves. Which is kinda petty.
Listening to Stephen Fry is comparable to when I was at school and I always willed for my teachers to go off on a tangent and share some of the most interesting things.
I would love a Fry and Jordan discussion on a regular basis, two great humans whom I have a lot of love and respect for.
The ability to entertain a thought without accepting it, is education.
Never let schooling get in the way of an education. Unfortunately faculty these days don't know the difference.
Aristotle right?
@@badlaamaurukehu Actually, some do. They are to be cherished.
It certainly leads to it.
@@daboys1941 that’s right, good catch!
Isn't it nice to listen to two people who have different perspectives on the world have a sensible conversation without it dissolving into mud slinging gibberish.
Yes, if only everyone were taught the arts of conversation, critical thinking and listening.
And to reach the end and realise that both of them are far closer in their view of the things that are truly important than the initial appearance might have suggested.
@Jason J well what I'm referring to is teaching like basic critical reasoning skills that could probably be taught in high school, like learning how to map and evaluate arguments and recognise fallacious reasoning. Of course college can enhance that depending of your area of study but it'd be cool if it was part of the public education system
Funny thing is they don't really they have the same perspective as stupid as it may sound they both desire good conversation knowledge and debate tbh they may not see it but they couldn't be more alike
@@psychcowboy1 I am aware that what his says has a lot of flaws, he makes unfounded speculations frequently etc and attempts to make everything everything fit in his one theory, even though he says he isn't an ideologue. He shouldn't be the only one you listen to for sure, but I think from all his experiences, intelligence and long time he's spent thinking about these things, he does have some valuable things to say; you just have to separate the wheat from the chaff.
I'm trying to write a sentence explaining how much I enjoyed this conversation, but nothing sounds eloquent enough having just heard these two speak so so brilliantly 😅 I'm excited though about the fact that I'm considering my words more carefully and wanting to communicate better after hearing these two 👍
I so so second this comment 😊
I thought the same things listening. Like wow I wish I could string together so many brilliant sounding things.
Then about halfway through I noticed what seemed like most things they are saying are just flowery language. I mean it's nice and entertaining but doesn't do much for me to better get their point across. 2 times that stuck out not to pick on Stephen but he said something then said or (some German expression) as the Germans would say. I immediately thought what does that have to do with the point? After that all I could think was all they're doing is going look how smart I am so you should really listen to my point. It's like let the point speak for itself. Another time he spent 20 seconds saying descriptions about how people see another person. Maybe I'm being too nitpicky. I definitely am but my point still remains.
Jordan especially does it when speaking about religion. He puts way too much stock into symbolism and deep meaning. Just like when they spoke about sunsets. Sunsets just look beautiful. It's unique as in nothing else can compare even though it happens all over all the time. Everywhere on earth a sunset is happening at every moment. Once you see em enough they lose their beauty to you. I think that's where this whole comment stems from. I've been listening to a lot of Jordan Peterson. At first I was in awe of how eloquent he spoke. The more I listen the more I see the patterns of how he makes ordinary things extraordinary. Well if it's so important then just let the point stand on its own. Don't build a castle of brilliant language around it.
@@thermalrain_yt9725 what it really comes down to is knowledge. No matter what he talks about, Stephen can probably draw knowledge and sources from dozens of books and hundreds of experiences. In that way it is not so surprising that he sometimes strays from the point.
I wholeheartedly agree, the fluidity of their speech shows the brilliance of their minds. The beauty of it all is the Stephen has taken that simple concept that myth and legend is the way our ancestors rationalise the world is no different to that of the artist and the playwright and even the scientist. Humans use these tools to explain the world and some call it religion and others philosophy but the key to it all is open discourse.
I love being the third wheel in these conversations. It's like watching your dad and uncle having a friendly discussion at a birthday party and you're trying to follow it, but half the time you don't have any idea what they're saying. And at the end without knowing it you learned somethings from both parties that you love. Jordan and Stephen I respect you both and wish you well with the blessing of the God that may or may not exist
Haha excellent!
Holy crap if this isn't one of the greatest crossovers of all time
If I had a dollar every time when I searched jbp and fry.....well I’ll have around 10 dollars😅
Listening to Fry and Peterson discuss religion is very interesting. But reminds me of when a group of fathers sit and discuss the pains of childbirth.
Both are not people of faith, and claim no religion.
@@JDAfrica yes exactly. Same thing I feel when Sam Harris talks about spirituality they are decoupling religion and spirituality. I haven't watched fully yet. Had to go for work. But since both have a good appreciation of Jung Nietzsche I'm expecting something great
@@johnsondominic7098 I’m half way in, I think the tale of Kronos and ancient Titan legends are fascinating.
That Kronos devours his children, to stop them rising up and challenging him, and that he carstrated his own father ... man, that’s one of the best pictures of a tyrannical father.
My thoughts exactly.
The world needs people like these 2 legends.
What a lovely and meaningful conversation between two people with rich knowledge of history and literature. Both of them have the wonderful quality of simplify complex thinking into a conversation most people can grasp. This is art.
Fry's knowledge of etymology and ability to quote both prose and poetry at length is astounding.
You should meet him. He's simply stunning. His books are incredible as well. None fiction which he receives too little credit for.
Knowledge is PUFFED up 1 corinthians 8 v1
Surely Fry hasn't quoted the best, timeless parable out there. He probably missed that book, certainly avoided that book..😄😄😄
The fool says in his heart there is no God.. No matter how many titles and achievements a person has , they are nothing . One day we will all die and we have to face our Creator.
@@jamaquinabella3378 hes a god hating reprobate fits romans 1 perfectly
If only everyone could have productive, honest conversations like this, instead of arguing and trying to appear right for the sake of their egos. Thanks boys, I really enjoyed that one!
Agreed! Let us all be that change. Perhaps it will catch on :)
@@jerrygreene1493 I think so. I thought that almost every sentence spoken contained a productive and useful idea which will take some unpacking, researching and digesting as Prof Peterson points out at the end.
"the sake of their egos".. They're clearly talking about issues beyond themselves. Some people find this patronising though, usually egotistical people.
@@jerrygreene1493 Found the theist..
@@jerrygreene1493 yes they did Jerry. Jordan highlighted that conscious, interests and reciprocity are outside of individual will. Fry reminds Jordan that the awareness brought about by games, motivations and conscious can lead to destruction on a grand scale (by focusing attention on the wrong things).
This is an incredibly rewarding conversation. We need much more of this.
Stephen Fry is that kind of guy who, while he doesn't know everything about anything, knows something about everything. You could talk to him about any topic and he would at least have a minimum knowledge about it enough to make the conversation last for a few minutes.
“Awe is an invitation to imitate!” What a powerful observation.
I really like this.
Which one of them said that? I love it!!
@@aleece4 Peterson. Great observation.
@@FaithEncouragedTV I read the comment before I got to that part in the conversation too ... thought the quote was from Fry, given his way with words, but not so ... bravo Peterson!
Yes. That gave me chills!
Yes that was good. Until Fry took Jordan's point in a weird, depressing direction.
Having access to the highest quality conversations like this is the real blessing of technological progress of the 21st century. We are truly live in the best possible times. Thank you for keeping this knowledge publicly available. And thank you for the strong and straightforward message in the world of bias and confusion. You realy changed my life and my perception of it!
Imagine Leo Da Vinci with internet.
@@psychcowboy1 or. . . . You didn't think about it.
The world should value both of these wonderful people. It is so enjoyable to listen to this back and forth. Both showing high respect for each other and sharing ideas that seem to conflict.
These are two of the most beautiful human beings I've had the honour of existing along side of. I truly hope there are more conversations like this as they are so insightful.
I was just thinking the other day "man it'd be cool if Stephen Fry got on here" 👍
An exquisite thought.
I've been hoping for this since he mentioned talking to Steven Fry in his interview with Ms. Arbour.
Same!!!!
@Gnome Whyte The only person he dates currently is his husband. Now, that's quite enough out of you.
Somehow in the vast cosmos, your thought contributed to this happening - thanks for that.
two of the most eloquent public intellectuals of our times having a conversation. Today is a good day.
some guy describe video. this comment is good coomment.
@abhimannue You took the words right outta my mouth... Ditto that 👏
@@erikpaterson1404 yes thank you, I am incredibly intelligent
Christmas has come early. Love these two and always hoped they'd have a proper conversation together.
@solomon real, you are indeed sir.
I have a great deal of admiration for both of these men. They are some of the few truly civilized human beings that open up the conversation to both aisles of the issues and give me hope we can fix this mess. Thanks to both of you for having the courage and for caring enough to speak.
This is what we need. People engaging in open, honest discussions and being willing to listen to each other to understand what is being said. Too often, people are unable to either listen, consider or disagree graciously - instead resortIng to ridicule or insult. Conversations such as these promote growth. Only talking within your comfort zones causes stagnation and polarisation.
It is so much fun being able to watch Peterson have discussions with people he wants to talk with as opposed to him being interviewed. The energy is so different, you can tell he is having a blast in this one.
I don’t mean this as an insult, but I like him more when speaking with someone who is intelligent! I don’t always agree with Jordan, but Fry & him are great together
Watching these two men having such an impressive conversation and being able to call to hand such a broad array of ideas and stories really makes me appreciate just how much more there is to learn!
@@jerrygreene1493 Two amazingly educated, knowledgeable and erudite men spend an hour and a half discussing the history of man's search for meaning and the ideas and theories that underpin or have formed our current world and that is all you can say.
And not getting charged for it either James :)
They read a lot of books. I recommend getting into the habit of reading a litle in a book every day. Then you will become interesting to have chat with as well.
@@jerrygreene1493 you don't understand the connection between things because you didn't want to watch it. I respect that. Just don't ask others to do your work.. especially if your work is solely criticism rather than taking what you want to take and leave behind what you don't. And if you don't find anything to take, then don't come back if you like.
Ignorance is bliss lol
Fry is very gentle with Peterson, like a doctor who doesn't want to break it to you, that you are mortal.
Yes. Either we agree on reality, or we agree to behave like there is room for it being open for debate.
There is always a way to reference things for hours and ppl will find it to be a sign of intellect, I love Stephen, but why cannot a simple topic be cleansed of other people's words, and instead use our language and thoughts on just getting to the point.
This was supposed to be a discussion, it was just an argument without having thing to firmly argue for.
Emotions are steering one, and the other accepts claims based on what?
Like my comment, it drags out, but imagine I dropped in a few hundred references that some person said, then another reference that cancels out the first if I adopt the thing necessary for the other part to also be right because whatsoever one must not be rude.
I found this to be insultingly pointless because it was nothing being argued for but the vagueness about one guy believing in god, but dare not to say it, and the other not addressing anything but what a guy once said that is best to talk about until the next attack at something and so it goes.
If you bothered to read what I wrote, can you please help me to find out what Steve said about the nature of reality back when Steve wrote "all cops are cunts" on the door of the toilet on one of his most profound night out drinking?
He always had something to say, and we should respect that.
@@SsspraakForsskkarring you clearly have a bias for Jordan Peterson if you see his unprovable beliefs alone as a valid foundation to argue on. at that point, literally anything is a good argument, which Stephen makes several genuinely good ones.
also where has Stephen written that? maybe cite your sources on a claim that substantial, because i couldn't find any proof whatsoever of that claim when i googled it. also even if he did write it, did you know that Peterson was a pill head for a short period of time?
@@ImHeadshotSniper you are not smart find another topic
@@markcredit6086 if you don't want me talking about it then you're clearly worried about something i said, otherwise you would have rationally argued against what i said instead of attempting to dictate what i am allowed to talk about
I am a 51-year-old man.. Stephen Fry was and is an utter hero of mine. When I was studying for A- levels he was an utter idol. When I was 8 years old I became obsessed with Greek mythology .. I went to my local library and drenched myself in it. And just LOVED it to a real point of utter distraction. I know ALL about it .. but when this great man wrote Mythos .. well .. amazing!
Better than any film & Stephen.. you are both Homeric & Hesodic!
Best wishes from a a scientifically minded person who’s real love is Greek mythology!
I absolutely love how excited and giddy they are when hearing the other's reasonings. It's the beauty of conversation.
I'm so excited about this discussion!!! I have wanted you to interact with Stephen since the whole fiasco debate with Dyson.
Rule #1: Avoid listening to anything Jordan Peterson says because he always lies and spreads anti semitic conspiracy theories.
Dyson* don’t disgrace the name Tyson with that buffoon.
@@just_a_turtle_chad Oh, come now. That's not true in the slightest. If anything, I would imagine the man is more sympathetic to pro-Jewish schools of thought than the opposite.
@@yusuffusuy4971 thnx, I didnt remember the name of that funny little man.
@@just_a_turtle_chad then why does Ben Shapiro like him so much?
This was a heady pleasure. I find you both very lovely as you grapple with these questions. I wish there were more such discussions in the public sphere. We need them badly. Thank you!
This is so intellectual stimulating so much knowledge shared between Jordan and Stephen so so inspiring and I found it really quite beautiful too - i was in awe at the awakenings and realisations I was having while listening to such depth of knowledge and understanding!
Great discussion. My takeaway is I need to read a LOT more.
Same aha
My takeaway is that it does not matter how much I read I will never be able to verbalise the thoughts and ideas I have just heard. Wow amazing I feel really quite humble.
Exactly my thought! It is a good indication that this was in fact a great discussion.
My takeaway is that both of these men are just plain F-in' smart.
you and every one else. i have always thought if you would spend more time in improving your self you would not have time to try to fix others.
This is a perfect illustration of how intelligent discourse should be presented and undertaken. A captivating delight from beginning to end.
Shame that the BBC seems to have lost the art of, or interest in, such non confrontational intelligent discourse. If only we had more of it!
@@robertcook9201 Oliver Reed put paid to that! lol
@Anthony Townsend A lot of pretentiousness in this discussion for me. A lack of plain English and waffle.
@@Coneman3 Would you like some maple syrup for that waffle?
The greatest human problem, however, is that most people are not interested in understanding the nature of reality or facing the difficulties of rational questioning and enquiry (or are incapable). So long as they can fulfill their most basic needs (vide. Maslow) they do not want to struggle towards "self realisation". So we will always be stuck with tribalism and aggression - so long as we have government that defers to the masses.
I listen to about 3 podcasts a day and this is one of the best conversations I’ve ever witnessed.
When you get two actual intellectuals come together,
They can actually postulate freely, its very refreshing
Anyone else wanting a Peterson / Fry podcast? I'd listen to that on repeat for the rest of my life.
Oh yes, that would be some intelectual candy i would absolutely devour.
@@chestnut1279 Peterson stated that it's not so much believing in God, but having a benefit from living as if God exists. I have no definitive conclusion on it myself but can see benefit for some in that. To regard a religious person to be beyond a deep conversation is a shallow opinion.
@@chestnut1279 Not a shallow opinion - an extremely brainless opinion. If anyone would be unable to have a deep conversation it would be you. --> Many of the smartest and most important thinkers of all time were deeply religious and believed in a god.
@@aaronyoung3758 I find Petersons view on that interesting and much more honest than actually saying you believe in God and then ignoring most of what the bible says. I can also understand his logic on the matter. I am an Atheist, but I also recognize the value the Bible and wat is written in it. Especially on a philosophical level.
I personally see the concept of God not as an external figure, but an internal one within ourselves. "God" is the representation of the things that we value most in our observable universe. I we believe that we suffer the conseqences of our poorly made choices and make them to be punishments of "God". We are infact punishing ourselves most of the time. Where "Hell" is the pit in which we fall through by failing in our struggles to climb to greater heights "Heaven".
I'm not sure if i'm explaining myself clearly, but I think the bible was never meant to be taken literally. the bible is a collection of art/literature meant to provoke thought and concideration as most books are meant to pass on knowledge and thought.
@@Scarletcroft I understand what you're saying but i think the 'God' Jordan is referring to is the idea of an almighty creator. both are valid and both can be right at the same time :)
A nice idea would be for Stephen to be the “interviewer” in the next discussion or the one directing the discussion, as the role Jordan played in this one
What would be the point? Jordan behaves exactly as though he's the one being interviewed by going on and on about his own views.
Or maybe Jordan should stop trying to direct the discussion so strictly.
@@katarinahinsey3931 It was not an interview it was a discussion, that's what people do in a discussion.
@@LiamPorterFilms I don't think he is directing it he is just trying to connect the different strands of the conversation together
Hmm, not sure how that would go. I think some ability to rein things in and impose parameters to the conversation, which Jordan supplies, is valuable to this kind of discussion, when you only have an hour-and-a-half. Which isn't to imply that Fry isn't extremely interesting to listen to, because he is, but if he were leading the conversation, things might ramble very far from wherever they began, and you'd hear a lot of interesting tidbits, but it might all be a bit, eh, free association....
Two exceptional, intelligent and interesting people. An absolute privilege to listen to these two talk and debate.
Adore this conversation, so much respect and chemistry between these two ❤ this is how different views are meant to be discussed.
Imagine having read the amount of books either Jordan or Stephen have? What an amazing conversation. Love both of them.
I was about to say almost the same exact thing. I decided instead, to comment on your statement. If I were to add anything. I’ll say,
I am rather impressed with myself for understanding the entire thing! LOL!! I’m most excited to head down a couple rabbit holes in the coming days. LOL!! 🤣
I don't read books so these conversations are life-giving!
@@imogenrex6286 why don't you try at least audiobooks? Reading is one of the greatest pleasures in life
@@imogenrex6286 i stopped reading for the most part when social pressure in school overwhelmed me. After that it was the lack of the habit. Once I started listening on audible my whole life turned around. So much to learn. Great courses plus on audible for example.
Also there is no pleasure similar, I am not saying better(whatever that may mean) to reading a delightfull book before sleeping. Or growing with the insights people have worked their lifetime to achieve and write down. Start to read two pages of let's say alice in wonderland and I dare you to be so bored to stop. That is not easy also :)
@Sanningen Bullshit everyone blames the elites for their own lack of character
I love that these two are talking to each other!
True liberalism.
@@jamesdellaneve9005 amen
A perfect example of 2 true genius gentlemen having a decent conversation. Thank you considering this is 100% completely free.
"one’s relationship to one country is intensely private, and it may be that one has great love for it, but that is complex and confounded with all kinds of disappointments and hatred and fear and shame as well as love" so well put!
I am a Catholic Christian and have been finding this conversation wonderful. Stephan is a generous soul. I appreciate his willingness, his gentleness in his discussion with JP. There is something poetic about Stephan's speech. It's just so nice to hear people be respectful and really listening to each other.
Christ - "the kingdom of heaven is within you " what do you need the catholic part for ? the matrix has you
And yet your church sees someone whose actions are "intrinsically disordered" and 'condemn his unnatural and unhealthy acts'.
Shame on them.
As a Catholic what is your opinion on the church the current pope and gays.
Fry seemed disappointed that the church was returning to more traditional opinions on homosexuality whereas I think this is a good thing.
Odd, I don't have a problem with homosexuals but I have a problem with the Catholic church not having a problem with homosexuals.
@@croweater6814 "I don't have a problem with homosexuals but I have a problem with the Catholic church not having a problem with homosexual"
I somewhat agree that it would be hypocritical for the Catholic church to say homosexuality was ok, and that the church should really be deemed disposable with the knowledge we have developed. Could you expand on why you believe it ok for the most powerful of churches, who holds such influence, to hold beliefs that encourage hate and fear?
@@insightuk I think and I could be wrong but it has something to do with the moral foundations of such an institution suppose to be immune from the sway of the public, an unbiased constant. To elaborate as Fry pointed out Catholic morality is suppose to be unchanging, it is and should be as set out by Peter at the start of the church till today, incorruptible and if anything unapologetically so. To pervert such an organisation based on the whims of the now or political trends of the day speaks volumes about the weakness in the systems of the institution. I have no special love for Catholics, but I do believe in western democracies their voices which often er on the side of Christian morality and purity are a net benefit to society.
If such an institution as old and longstanding as the Catholic church can be perverted and subverted by intersectionality it stands to reason that none of our secular institutions with relative moral standards can withstand the onslaught of the regressive left. It isn't just homosexuality that catholicism has bent the knee to, it has also bent the knee to both Judaism and Islam in accepting that they are valid religions. (What good is a religion if it accepts another religion may be valid.)
The "decline" of church morality and supremacy is purely due to the deconstructivist social Marxism that is so pervasive in western democracies. In essence it is an attack on the foundations of western morality, which in our secular societies may not appear as immediately bad. I would rather see the church end with its moral foundations intact than to see it continue with the regressive left wearing it like a skin suit dictating their version of morality; Some of which is quite repugnant.
Two thoroughly decent and intelligent men. What an utter pleasure.
I respect Stephen Fry in many things but there are certain opinions of his that I do not agree with.
That being said, anytime that he is mentioned in popular culture... I pay attention.
@@AntonioSilvaToronto Couldn't agree more, so great to see these two sit down and have a conversation despite petty differences.
@@ghimbos he let JBP appear to take the lead.
Peterson’s adoption of the value of adhering to religion is interesting. His selection of Christianity specifically, is confounding. Rather than the argument from evil dispelling the idea of a benevolent god,, it seems the improbability of having selected the “correct” religion should be at least as compelling to dissuade him from his acceptance without empirical evidence. It definitely seems he is most likely an atheist but concurrently a Christian apologist because of his perspective of the better option to guide the direction of the world. The stance is somewhat ironical, because though his followers almost certainly miss this likelihood, it is his apologist characteristic combined with “anti-left” position that attracts them. To sum it up, it is a different approach to bullshitting, a highly educated, well spoken, otherwise “enlightened” Christian, adopting a somewhat anti-intellectual stance.
@@ghimbos lots. Did it leave you behind? Try and watch it again. Plenty on both sides to admire.
ive not ever watched two more emotionally cultivated men have such a cohesive dialogue . its also amazing to see how much frys words have affected jordan and the mercy thats shown each way
A virtual Agora at its finest. The most educational and intellectually dense conversation I’ve seen and heard on CZcams.
Man i can't believe im listening to this for free!!
God bless you dr
Wtf? Don't even think that! Its the thin end of the wedge. 🙏
Yes, indeed. For free! Blessed are the... Oh, no.... How fortunate we are.
wow! want the time of day from me and you've gotta pay that's for sure.
@@jaccrystal6993 really? how much for that snippet!? Edit for debt anxiety
@@djonfonsteen6331 except for charity cases such as a p for snipet(sic).
Stephen is so well read it's outrageous - please do a part 2. Thank you for posting this beautiful conversation.
And he seems to actually remember 90% of it, and is able to recall at any time - thats what i can't get my head around
But the kind of well read person who wants everyone to know about it lol
Or better still, perhaps make it a regular series?
and part 3, and 4, and... fuck it, let’s make this monthly.
@@trickeyD yeah man, his range is nuts, CS Lewis, GK Chesterton, knowledgeable of early 20th century British scientific advances, drama, pantomimes, opera, botany, pharmacology, Theology you name it he's got it!
Stephen Fry is a pleasure to see him discuss such topics
Wow...I've watched many interviews with Jordan Peterson & this was the first time I caught a brief glimpse of his being delighted during a discussion. I could feel the delightment for a moment and found myself smiling for him. It was so nice to see Dr. Peterson enjoying sharing his insight & opionions rather than being on the defense or offense during interviews.
I truly appreciate Dr. PETERSON & his sincerity to find truth.
N'yawęh to his Mr. FRYE for being a polite guest and for bringing his host a small but wonderful gift...a moment of pure delight. What a treat.
N'yawęh, JoJo
Jordan is looking so healthy, thank God for that. Bless him.
If you, Jordan, or anyone presents evidence of anything not physical (energy-matter-information) or dependent upon it, a Nobel Prize awaits! (along with ~ a million dollars)
That light colored suit really helps him "pop" here. Lol. But yes, I noticed a palpable & an immediate difference in his energy or emotional state with in the first few moments. Thank you Mr. Fry & Peterson. I can't help but imagine how great a new episode of A Bit of Fry & Laurie would be, with Jordan Peterson as a "guest on the couch" in conversation with Fry, as Laurie is interrupting with a piano section or addressing the audience with an instruction on how to mix the latest nonsense cocktail.
@@stevenkurtz1660 huh??
D3☀️
He has a tan and it looks really good on him.
We're so lucky to be able to listen to such conversations. What a time to be alive.
We could before the net too. Hard talk used to be good when hitch did it. Now it's just left wing dribble
The romans had their public baths where this conversations were had.
And to honour them, I listen to this while taking a bath.
This sort of encounters have been the mark of great civilizations.
Amazing conversation, thank you both!
Brilliant conversation. Always been a great admirer of Stephen Fry and his wit and intellect. I found the exchange of both your insights and profound knowledge incredibly stimulating and thought provoking.
I must say, he's getting so much better at not interrupting. What an amazing interview!
@Emil This.
@@tayzk5929 I understand, but no. Let him say all he wants to say (within reason, in good faith), otherwise we strawman him.
Patience, respect & strong counter-arguments is where common good wins, not interrupting.
Always treat a man as you want to be treated yourself
I don't think he should let claims or truisms go unchallenged in the moment as if they are fact when they require greater explanation and there's nothing wrong with interjecting to get great clarity before someone continues down the path they are going. He's not chatting with stoners after all
Especially in these last two (McGilchrist and Fry)... but part of me thinks that’s just because he respects them so deeply. What amazing interviews, back to back.
@@calgakispict3652why are you conflating challenging or asking clarification of someones point with interupting them? If anything interuptions only serve to create a less coherent and cohesive discussion . Fry was clarly a bit frustrated by being interupted and blindsided with multiple questions at once. And shitting on 'stoners' is a really weird way to drive your point home.
Fry really is on a completely unique level
Gotta give Jordan some kudos for thinking he could take fry on intellectually though. He held his own to be fair. But yeah, Fry is the Oscar Wilde of our time. Thinks on a completely different level
Not true.
@@pepryan2183 woah there, take it easy big man
@@pepryan2183 Profound counterpoint.
He's certainly a little brighter than Peterson (watch the last few minutes). Or perhaps just older and thus better read.
Didn’t expect this crossover, but it was very refreshing to see. Great minds.
Crossover? What does that mean?
Not that surprising of a crossover, with all due respect. They are intellectual powerhouses, of course they were bound to one day talk.
On the other hand, Jordan and Theo Von is a much stranger interaction.
these surprises are the gift of the dark web - 'dark' as in not seen and heard enough!
They did a debate together against the woke. Fry is a titan.
Of course so is JBP
It is wonderful to hear two such intellects speak to each other at a level that most of us can but see in awe
Hopefully a second episode. This conversation could definitely continue. Thanks for the episode!
Mad respect to ANY consumate individualist such as Stephen Fry who is willing to listen to anyone regardless of view point because we can be friends, break bread, share mead and have a laugh at ourselves despite our differences. THAT is the REAL meat of existence and those that have forsaken that(namely the Identitarians) are truly lost.
Well said
“Identitarians” 👍
I think it’s more that he respects JBP because of his popularity. Naive ISTJ imo.
The sheer amount of vile and nasty comments about both fry and peterson on just the first page of comments shows how incredibly important it is to keep sharing our ideas.
Have open discussions, talk about anything that tickles your fancy.
Celebrate individual standpoints, instead of forcing groupthink on a person just so they "belong" to a group, that you can then generalize in your mind.
This episode was a joy to listen to.
@AManHas NoName
Ahh there he is again.
Why are you shitting on fry?
I'm a jbp fan, but fry and peterson have had an absolutely wonderful collaboration during the munk debate.
This episode was coming, and both men wanted to chat.
Why are you being so toxic?
You profess to be this defender of peterson, but you're kind of missing his entire point, mate.
Let people enjoy their things.
Which rule was it again, the one that tells you to let kids skate on the street, to stop to pet a cat when you see one?
“Wisdom tells me I am nothing, beauty tells me I am everything”. How wonderfully it manifests through these two. As always, incredible treat for the mind and the soul.
Big jimmy Willy woombie
@@hmu05366 He sounds like a great man!
Beautifully said. I wholeheartedly agree.
Listen you’re 100% correct. I think this everyday. We are nothing yet everything. Just like the o universe coming out of nothing going into nothing
Jungian in principle to truly understand the philosophy of Jordan Peterson is to know the life work of carl jung
Among other things, I'm grateful to Mr. Peterson for the way he values and points out and gives space to art and artists, respectively. Why are some of the most valuable objects in the world paintings? Why do so many hang on the every word/output and appearance of certain artists?
Because they play a vital role in helping us understand ourselves and our world...Just as important and valid of a contribution as any scientist, researcher, theologian or philosopher. The artist holds up a useful and important mirror to our culture, our nature, and our collective and individual self-deceit. That is priceless. And so needed, always!