Well, what do you mean by “chef”? Chef is French for chief. It means head, or master, or perhaps some kind of authority. But I think we need to see the operational function of when hierarchical systems of authority and power structures where the mastery of the craft and the bearer of knowledge is given decision making capability and agency over a particular domain wherein the epistemological implications are that transverse authorities are disregarded because as it is, there are already too many cooks in the kitchen.
@@Daniel-mw7puThe kitchen can handle lots and lots of cooks. It’s the broth that suffers from too many cooks. But I would call Pedosan the Cobb of wordsalads, not the chef.
BS. Dude looks like at least *four* different Batman Villains, cosplaying other Batman Villains. He's basically Scarface cosplaying Mad Hatter cosplaying Joker cosplaying Two Face. Was Crazy Quilt a Batman villain? If so, make it five Batman villains. Jorbo Porbo dresses like he was turned into Harley Quinn's Harley Quinn.
"I know the story doesn't have anything to do with this, but I like it as an idea, so I'm going to say it does, and then because I said it, people will believe it, and when enough people believe it, it will transmogrify into a sort of truth...."
Well, you know, as long as JP *likes* it, well, man, that is real epistemological heft right there. His liking it. That’s grade-A evidence. How much fun it gives him. Ask him what theory unifying quantum mechanics with general relativity gives him a little chuckle. Let’s end the debate at last!
@@thescoobymike lol. I think the dots on his necktie are actually his face. Couldn’t magnify large enough to be sure though. However I agree. I always had a soft spot for unconventional styles of clothing and that’s the only thing I admire of Peterson. I think he said that a tailoring company approached him proposing him to wear their suits that they had designed for him. Idk if the same suits are also for sale to the public or it’s just a brand advertising.
Jordan Peterson enjoys hearing the sound of his own voice, regardless of whether the words he speaks are truthful or fanciful. (The majority of his opinions are the latter)
I thought this was a surprisingly self aware statement on Peterson's part, is he close to admitting that the patriarchy is an imperfect/sinful system??? 🤔 Definitely not, but one can dream 😂
@@infiniti28160 I would associate vanity with the vain, because it's not inherent to either gender or sex except in so much as the local social norms incentivize it. If you looked into a room full of women covered head to toe in black Burkas, would you say that they are inherently more or less prone to vanity than male Andrew Tate stan dressed like the Joker cosplaying Two-Face?
Genesis 3:6 “When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. “
Hey, I was in the class that you talked with today. It was great thanks for answering our questions. I’m not sure if you’ll remember but I asked about the leviathan/ sea beast again thanks for making time for us!
@VoodooChild333 Yeah, but I like K-pop. I was thinking more of a suit on a morning sport show or something? Regardless, it's not a great look for old Jordie there.
@@lysanamcmillan7972 Ha ha ha, wow I forgot about him. But a time lord can clearly pull off the look, not so much Jordan though. The only thing more wacky than his suit is his ideas.
He stole his professorial salary from the taxpayers of Ontario when it turned out he spent decades using his academic position to rail against Marxism without having read any actual Marxists.
Everyone semed to be in love with Peterson for a while. Thank goodness most of us have woken up. He uses too many words to say little and what he does say is worthless. A perfect example of presentation over content.
Peterson is the contemporary example of the W.C. Fields quote "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit". He makes himself sound smart and going on at length about something, and it often takes time to figure out what exactly he's saying. He thrives on people arguing philosophical points of what he said instead of doing what they should do, as Dan did: pointing out that his very basis is wrong and he's just making crap up.
Jordan Peterson just spouting a stream of consciousness, playing word association games with himself. Nothing to see here, folks, move along, move along... "...like the time I caught the ferry over to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for my shoe, so, I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on 'em. "Give me five bees for a quarter," you'd say. Now, where were we? Oh yeah, the important thing was I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn't have white onions because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones..."
Aside for SOME of his self-help, everything else Peterson says in 95+% inane... or flat out lies. I HIGHLY recommend the entertaining and informative video "A Brief Look At Jordan Peterson" on the Some More News.
Just how great is that 5% that you consider non-inane. Iirc, it seemed like harmless platitudes. Make your bed in the morning, etc. nothing that was especially insightful. Then he became the white night of inceldom.
@@MarcosElMalo2 I wrote "aside for some of his self-help." Watch the Some More News video. Jordan has big (terrible) opinions on climate change, economic policy, etc.
@@stephenleblanc4677 The Wisecrack channel has a few on him as well, including deeper dives into his specific areas of being terrible at it. Knowing Some More News, they likely reach compatible conclusions.
“She can speak for the poisonous & inedible.” But they ATE it and did not even get sick (let alone die) from it. I don’t think that was the author’s point.
Peterson is the king of word salads. He's the poster child for finding a crowd to lead rather than standing for something and letting the crowd gather.
Of all channels I am subscribed to and enjoy, this one consistently has the meanest comments -- if people aren't insulting each other in the comment section, then of course many must insult whoever Dr. McClellan is responding to. Is it really too much to ask that folks remain civil and discuss and debate others' ideas instead of their personal appearances?
@@williamspears1627That's not the fairest generalisation in this case. Keep in mind that Dan specifically covers controversial content, so by nature of this fact, that controversy will play out in the comments.
The captions mistake "etiologies" and instead transcribe it as "ideologies". This is the second or third time I have noticed this. Hopefully this can be fixed in the future, because it would be quite confusing if I couldn't hear what you were saying.
What does he mean, "Adam listening to Eve?" Read the text of Genesis 3:6. Adam saw and heard the snake speech and everything. She didn't have to bring the fruit back to camp; he was standing right next to her the whole time. She didn't say anything to him; she didn't try to convince him to eat it with her "feminine wiles". She just made a handoff and he ate it.
You're blatantly wrong about this one. You guys are such contrarians. Don't Believe me? Read Genesis 3 for yourself. Adam obviously wasn't there when she was speaking with the serpent. He was around in the sense of being somewhat nearby that section of the garden, but he was not present.
@@williamspears1627 Genesis 3:6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, *who was with her*, and he ate it. Thanks for playing, though. We have some lovely parting gifts for you.
Over the years, I have been and still am to a degree a fan of Jordan Peterson mainly because his teachings and lectures have helped me navigate through rough or confusing parts of my life as well as the sense that he is genuine in his good will towards individuals bettering themselves, but even I admit that he often (especially recently) is very prone to word salad and making a ton of philosophical leaps and presuppositions in order to make his points. I prefer him when he’s in his more psychological and scientifically backed lane than when he’s mapping his philosophical leanings onto ancient stories and traditions. That’s when he starts to lose me.
@@lysanamcmillan7972 As far as I can tell, Jorbo Porbo hasn't been within fifty light years of Evolutionary Psychology. His schtick has pretty much exclusively been Jungian philosophy, which is essentially attributing human psychology to a combination of memes and effin' magic. Edit: the closest he gets to it is his whole obsession with lobsters, but that entire bit is an extremely superficial way to say "the hierarchical structures that currently exist and coincidentally place me near the top for being born a white cis man are natural and good and anyone that tries to change it even to better their own position is objectively wrong, because lobsters naturally have heirarchy!" Actual experts in both evolutionary psychology and lobsters pretty much flat out call him a quack on that entire analogy.
@@lnsflare1 From what I’ve seen, this is a complete strawman of his position. His reference to lobsters is only meant to highlight the fact that hierarchies are not a new human or an even particularly capitalist invention. His point is that they’ve existed even within the nervous systems of prehistoric animals ie; the lobsters. He neither defends it or opposes it…he merely states the fact of its existence to people who want to tear down the idea of hierarchies because from their perspective the whole concept is an evil western capitalist invention.
@@iamdanielmonroe And, putting aside that his description of how lobsters behave is apparently incorrect, and especially his citation of how serotonin affects lobster brains is relevant to how serotonin affects the drastically student human brains, that's his response whenever someone asks him something along the lines of whether or not people are wrong to want to try to change the current systems, making it a deflection tactic that says nothing. It also has absolutely nothing to do with actual Evolutionary Psychology other than him incorrectly describing lobster biology instead of citing works of fiction as is his normal modus operandi.
Tangentally related question to how later Christians interpreted thing I've seen a fair amount of apologetics that say when in Isaiah it says "I make evil" the word used there is also used for things like natural disasters and thus the passage is only talking about those kinds of things. Is there truth to that, or is it just apologetic sleight of hand?
If Peterson truly has become popular with evangelicals, I'm honestly a little surprised. They typically like a straight-forward, literalist view of the text, right? I would have thought that evangelicals would reject Peterson's more "creative", metaphorical interpretation. Perhaps they just find him politically or socially useful?
I think that’s a really good point. Interestingly, evangelicals have done this for decades with C.S. Lewis. The guy is their patron saint of apologetics and yet he thought most (if not all) of the Old Testament was myth.
I liked Jordan Peterson for about five minutes, especially before i deconverted from Christianity. Once he really got popular in certain circles and he started going off the deep end and spouting things outside his expertise and knowledge I fairly quickly stopped paying attention to him. He's almost like a neo- William F Buckley Jr
It also doesn't say that Adam and Eve was made perfect. Whatever. Points for trying to Jordan Peterson on this one for me, because although he fails miserably at making logical sense of it to me, at least he's choosing to derive some kind of value from it as he always does. I can respect that. Can't say the same for that suit though.
We negotiate with texts to gain knowledge, which was in essence , the pride of interpretation that the snake gave Eve . Before the fall , there was nothing to interpret, or negotiate. that’s the point of the story- in my interpretation of course. Christ died for believers and non believers. The new covenant is very clear in why/how it predicts a second coming also.
@@MarcosElMalo2But he was wrong about that. “When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. “
I like seeing Dan taking on clowns like Peterson rather than rando tiktokkers or whatever. Peterson's nonsense at least comes with some unearned status and "credibility" that Dan can shatter with -- in this case -- a baffled smirk, followed by the reasoning that supports said smirk. Watching Dan engaging with, especially when it becomes a back and forth, pitiful nitwits who are out of their depth just feels sad.
Well, he needn’t burden himself too much with this effort; if Trump and white evangelicals have already shown us how easily & even eagerly they are to be grifted.
This is a much better look for Dan, when he opposes influential speakers. Some of his videos, where he is opposing some guy in his mom's basement, are like shooting a cannon at a mosquito.
Years ago I liked Paterson a lot and I owe it him that I started link up more idea and topics. Since he was so very sick he has come back as a believer it seems. Rationality flies out window. Early Peterson before he got sick is useful.
Maybe on his 12 rules advice (I'd question that), but he was always off the wall with his takes on current events philosophy, and his interpretations of the Heroes Journey
Concerning the 'toiling laboriously for food'. I've thought for a while god created man to be his gardener. Would like to know if there is a "why" god created man in genesis, or a school of thought about that.
Please do more videos addressing Peterson's Bible grifting. People who just make shit up and speak it authoritatively need to be taken down a notch and viewed through the lens of discretion.
I’ve always thought that JP uses his apparent “Christian” beliefs as a method to get a lot of people on board to his way. Very much like what everyone who is a supposed “Christian” does to but in a different way. Things like hypocrisy, dogma, self serving and delusion is the order of the day.
I wonder if inference is actually taught in biblical and religious learning avenues. It doesn't seem like it is. A considerable amount of literature is actually very symbolic, and even Jesus uses parables and stories to tell a greater tale, which he probably adopted from the ancient Egyptians for the same reason. We can't take everything literally.
I watched a number of his lectures of mythological psychology before I said a word, then blocked. Only his way or the highway. Same thing with scholars that obviously have not a clue to what Tauroctony symbolizes and don't want to hear any other ideas.
Jordan Peterson, the chef of word salads.
Well, what do you mean by “chef”? Chef is French for chief. It means head, or master, or perhaps some kind of authority. But I think we need to see the operational function of when hierarchical systems of authority and power structures where the mastery of the craft and the bearer of knowledge is given decision making capability and agency over a particular domain wherein the epistemological implications are that transverse authorities are disregarded because as it is, there are already too many cooks in the kitchen.
@@Daniel-mw7puwhat did you mean by french? Its not entirely obvious to me or anyone for that matter.
@@Daniel-mw7puThe kitchen can handle lots and lots of cooks. It’s the broth that suffers from too many cooks.
But I would call Pedosan the Cobb of wordsalads, not the chef.
@@Daniel-mw7pu 👏🤌
@@Daniel-mw7puWell played
Gotta respect Peterson's commitment to looking like a Batman villain.
It wasn't that long ago that he provided the world (when it didn't ask) with commentary on said villain.
I just commented the same thing...haha
BS.
Dude looks like at least *four* different Batman Villains, cosplaying other Batman Villains. He's basically Scarface cosplaying Mad Hatter cosplaying Joker cosplaying Two Face.
Was Crazy Quilt a Batman villain? If so, make it five Batman villains.
Jorbo Porbo dresses like he was turned into Harley Quinn's Harley Quinn.
hahahahaha
@@lnsflare1 "Dude looks like at least four different Batman Villains..." lololOMG 😆🤣💀::ded::
Jordan Peterson isn’t a windbag, he’s a hurricanesack.
totally stealing that LOL
A regular tornado-tote(bag)!
Why? Because he does not agree with you nutty left-wing viewpoints?
@@johnnastrom9400 Because he rambles on for hours without actually making any real points.
@@johnnastrom9400 Because he talks a load of codswallop with overemotional tropes.
"The fruit was inedible." Literally the opposite of that. LITERALLY the OPPOSITE. Gen 6:3
"I like the idea that pride comes before a fall," says Muppet Two-Face, displaying his superhuman resistance to irony.
"I know the story doesn't have anything to do with this, but I like it as an idea, so I'm going to say it does, and then because I said it, people will believe it, and when enough people believe it, it will transmogrify into a sort of truth...."
@@bskec2177 I came here to say this very thing.
All you have to do is resist it attaching to your metaphysical substrate.
Well, you know, as long as JP *likes* it, well, man, that is real epistemological heft right there. His liking it. That’s grade-A evidence. How much fun it gives him.
Ask him what theory unifying quantum mechanics with general relativity gives him a little chuckle. Let’s end the debate at last!
hahaha perfect mate
At least JP is now dressing in clown costume for accurate identification purposes.
You mean he is channeling the archetype of the Jester
As much as I hate him I kinda like the suit ngl lol
@@thescoobymike lol. I think the dots on his necktie are actually his face. Couldn’t magnify large enough to be sure though.
However I agree. I always had a soft spot for unconventional styles of clothing and that’s the only thing I admire of Peterson. I think he said that a tailoring company approached him proposing him to wear their suits that they had designed for him. Idk if the same suits are also for sale to the public or it’s just a brand advertising.
@@thescoobymike His new suits are pretty hit and miss, but this is on the better end of that spectrum.
@@thescoobymike Wonder how much of his ill-gotten, exorbitant income he spent on it.
The real original sin is that suit Peterson is wearing. 😜
Lol, I dunno. I’d have to go with his horrible Twitter suit for that one! 😂
A bit of pride showing through in his wardrobe? Ironic.
I love the suit! It makes me think of a Jane Austin film!
Jordan Peterson "I like that idea". I suppose that's why you made it up.
You beat me to this comment. He says it all right there with those four words.
That look @ 1:41 is the quintessential intellectual reaction to the majority of JP's rhetoric and nonsense.
You miss it lol by pointing to 1:41. It's actually 1:39 and 1:40.
It's also the way laypeople react, unless they're posing as turbo-intellectuals.
Jordan Peterson's fit for the day is Joker visits Smurf Village. The crossover no one wanted.
Your comment *literally* made me LOL! 😂 Awesome!
Superficial and Sophomoric. 👏🏼 Perfect summary, sir.
Jordan Peterson enjoys hearing the sound of his own voice, regardless of whether the words he speaks are truthful or fanciful. (The majority of his opinions are the latter)
In spite of the sickening sound of his voice and its tendency towards incoherence.
Peterson speaks truthful words in the same way that a stopped clock is right twice a day.
2:01 "Men's pride motivates them to attempt to appear bigger than they are in the eyes of women". That just about sums up Jordan Peterson.
Good luck with that after Eve saw the serpent. You know the saying? Once you see a snake, you never go bake.
I thought this was a surprisingly self aware statement on Peterson's part, is he close to admitting that the patriarchy is an imperfect/sinful system??? 🤔
Definitely not, but one can dream 😂
@@infiniti28160vanity is a human trait, no? Why would it be the trait of one of the 78 genders?
Because gay people don't exist and apparently never have.
@@infiniti28160 I would associate vanity with the vain, because it's not inherent to either gender or sex except in so much as the local social norms incentivize it.
If you looked into a room full of women covered head to toe in black Burkas, would you say that they are inherently more or less prone to vanity than male Andrew Tate stan dressed like the Joker cosplaying Two-Face?
Peterson never ceases to amaze me. I've never heard anyone that can say absolutely nothing with so many words.
And such unwarranted confidence!
The Bible seems to mean whatever its readers want it to mean. It’s like a Rorschach test.
Yep. Peterson’s doesn’t come out too well
And every generation claims to have the perfect understanding in comparison to all other generations before
Well, really that's true of all literature
@@toniacollinske2518 That's actually a really good point, however, most literature is recognized as fiction whereas the bible is, well, not, I guess.
Yes, but contrarily, it also never quite seems to say what people think it says.
Jordan Peterson has always been a clown 🤡 , and now he's dressing appropriately
Wow, he's even dressing like a comic supervillain now.
If the fruit was inedible, then what’s God’s problem? Why even bother with the prohibition? He might as well have said, “Don’t eat the sun.”
Those rocks on the ground, don't eat those either.
Will they give me magic knowledge?
No, they're just rocks. They'll break your teeth.
We can't expect an analysis by Peterson to actually reach such depths. His gig is tickling people's ears and collecting millions.
@@ronaldflint681He looks like a professional tickler. Junior Division.
Genesis 3:6 “When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. “
Jordan Peterson is a man who speaks with such confidence. Like some kind of confidence man. Like some kind of conman, one might say.
Until he gets weepy.
He's a sophist. Gets paid to sound wise while not actually having to know anything.
On the behalf of Canada I would like to apologize to the world for Jordan Peterson
I like to simplify it and blame Calgary.
Apology not accepted!! At least, not without groveling and reparations.
Well, then do it, don’t say you’d like to do it. Apologize. Say you’re soorry.
That's okay. You also gave us Eugene Levy. I forgive you.
@@johnrichardson7629 And John Candy...
That suit. I can’t take him serious.
I don't have enough salad dressing to consume Jordan's word salad!
That’s why he dressed so well for you in that suit
*Peterson seems very proud* of his argument. But pride in others is bad, right Jordan?
Thanks so much for this Dan! When i first saw Peterson talking about this, my spidey senses went off. But I couldn't take it apart like you can.
Elmo says, "Nice outfit and shoes, Jordan!"
“…Peterson’s grift of white evangelicalism.” Meow! That cuts deeply.
Hey, I was in the class that you talked with today. It was great thanks for answering our questions. I’m not sure if you’ll remember but I asked about the leviathan/ sea beast again thanks for making time for us!
wtf is Peterson wearing? What happened to that guy?
A woman probably suggested some fashion updates and he decided to do something completely opposite because women don't tell him what to do.
@tiredoftrolls2629 right on! Probably accurate AF.
He became a bat man villain. Like full on.
Well, it depends on what you mean by "responding"...
I know we aren't supposed to comment about appearance, and I am commenting on his suit, not his appearance. What is going on with that suit?
@VoodooChild333 Yeah, but I like K-pop. I was thinking more of a suit on a morning sport show or something? Regardless, it's not a great look for old Jordie there.
@@lde-m8688 If you've seen the Colin Baker episodes of Doctor Who, I have one word for you: Mel.
@@lysanamcmillan7972 Ha ha ha, wow I forgot about him. But a time lord can clearly pull off the look, not so much Jordan though. The only thing more wacky than his suit is his ideas.
Why is he dressed like a Batman villain?
He stole his professorial salary from the taxpayers of Ontario when it turned out he spent decades using his academic position to rail against Marxism without having read any actual Marxists.
He might be.
Everyone semed to be in love with Peterson for a while. Thank goodness most of us have woken up. He uses too many words to say little and what he does say is worthless. A perfect example of presentation over content.
Peterson is the contemporary example of the W.C. Fields quote "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit". He makes himself sound smart and going on at length about something, and it often takes time to figure out what exactly he's saying. He thrives on people arguing philosophical points of what he said instead of doing what they should do, as Dan did: pointing out that his very basis is wrong and he's just making crap up.
Jordan Peterson just spouting a stream of consciousness, playing word association games with himself. Nothing to see here, folks, move along, move along...
"...like the time I caught the ferry over to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for my shoe, so, I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on 'em. "Give me five bees for a quarter," you'd say. Now, where were we? Oh yeah, the important thing was I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn't have white onions because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones..."
Not many would take on Peterson! Good job Dan!
I love Peterson's suits now. Yes, the haters will make fun...but his style is awesome.
It takes chutzpah akin to how he lies for a living to dress like that.
@@lysanamcmillan7972 jealous, eh?
Oh, I would have said he’s batshit crazy!
Only JP could go on a ten minute monologue about some esoteric biblical allegory in Genesis only to end up at "trans people bad"
Love it! Well said, well spoken & right on!
Awesomeness
Peterson makes it up as he goes. Word salads are a quick fix for his audience and he knows it.
Aside for SOME of his self-help, everything else Peterson says in 95+% inane... or flat out lies. I HIGHLY recommend the entertaining and informative video "A Brief Look At Jordan Peterson" on the Some More News.
Just how great is that 5% that you consider non-inane. Iirc, it seemed like harmless platitudes. Make your bed in the morning, etc. nothing that was especially insightful. Then he became the white night of inceldom.
@@MarcosElMalo2 I wrote "aside for some of his self-help." Watch the Some More News video. Jordan has big (terrible) opinions on climate change, economic policy, etc.
@@stephenleblanc4677 The Wisecrack channel has a few on him as well, including deeper dives into his specific areas of being terrible at it. Knowing Some More News, they likely reach compatible conclusions.
“She can speak for the poisonous & inedible.”
But they ATE it and did not even get sick (let alone die) from it. I don’t think that was the author’s point.
I think he may have read an executive summary of a Wikipedia article on the subject of the theology of the Fall.
That was very informative and enjoyable.😁
Peterson is the king of word salads. He's the poster child for finding a crowd to lead rather than standing for something and letting the crowd gather.
listen to JP make me remeber how I had to write nonsense for a literature class. Requirement: write a 5000 words essay to analyze a 50 words poem
Thank you!
Oh it so sucks when there is that single dude listening who actually read the text, understood it, and remembered…
Poor JBP.
Sick T shirt! Also the unpacking of existential concerns is fine or whatever.
Ooh, someone call 911! Peterson needs rescuing from these devastating burns.
I wouldn't buy a used car from anyone wearing that suit!
That hit home like a Wanted Poster.
Nailed it.
Dr. McClellan, what are your thoughts on the new X-men '97?
Hold on. I'm calling Webster to see if he'll put Peterson's face in the entry for casuistry.
Dayum. Take no prisoners, Dan. PS: I utterly adore you. Peterson, the grifter
If you listen even for a few seconds, you can pick up whom Jordan Peterson worships. It's not the I Am. It's the I Like That.
Of all channels I am subscribed to and enjoy, this one consistently has the meanest comments -- if people aren't insulting each other in the comment section, then of course many must insult whoever Dr. McClellan is responding to. Is it really too much to ask that folks remain civil and discuss and debate others' ideas instead of their personal appearances?
A person's fanbase is often a reflection of who they are.
@@williamspears1627That's not the fairest generalisation in this case. Keep in mind that Dan specifically covers controversial content, so by nature of this fact, that controversy will play out in the comments.
The captions mistake "etiologies" and instead transcribe it as "ideologies". This is the second or third time I have noticed this. Hopefully this can be fixed in the future, because it would be quite confusing if I couldn't hear what you were saying.
Rudyard Kipling also came up with some tales to explain animals. I am sure JP could produce a long, wrong rant about them, too.
What does he mean, "Adam listening to Eve?" Read the text of Genesis 3:6. Adam saw and heard the snake speech and everything. She didn't have to bring the fruit back to camp; he was standing right next to her the whole time. She didn't say anything to him; she didn't try to convince him to eat it with her "feminine wiles". She just made a handoff and he ate it.
You're blatantly wrong about this one. You guys are such contrarians. Don't Believe me? Read Genesis 3 for yourself. Adam obviously wasn't there when she was speaking with the serpent. He was around in the sense of being somewhat nearby that section of the garden, but he was not present.
@@williamspears1627 Genesis 3:6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, *who was with her*, and he ate it.
Thanks for playing, though. We have some lovely parting gifts for you.
Jordan Peterson is the guy who likes apples in Good Will Hunting all grown up.
Over the years, I have been and still am to a degree a fan of Jordan Peterson mainly because his teachings and lectures have helped me navigate through rough or confusing parts of my life as well as the sense that he is genuine in his good will towards individuals bettering themselves, but even I admit that he often (especially recently) is very prone to word salad and making a ton of philosophical leaps and presuppositions in order to make his points. I prefer him when he’s in his more psychological and scientifically backed lane than when he’s mapping his philosophical leanings onto ancient stories and traditions. That’s when he starts to lose me.
That is the tragedy of Dr. Peterson. He started out a well-respected psychologist. Then he got infected by evolutionary psych and the descent began.
@@lysanamcmillan7972 As far as I can tell, Jorbo Porbo hasn't been within fifty light years of Evolutionary Psychology. His schtick has pretty much exclusively been Jungian philosophy, which is essentially attributing human psychology to a combination of memes and effin' magic.
Edit: the closest he gets to it is his whole obsession with lobsters, but that entire bit is an extremely superficial way to say "the hierarchical structures that currently exist and coincidentally place me near the top for being born a white cis man are natural and good and anyone that tries to change it even to better their own position is objectively wrong, because lobsters naturally have heirarchy!" Actual experts in both evolutionary psychology and lobsters pretty much flat out call him a quack on that entire analogy.
@@lnsflare1 From what I’ve seen, this is a complete strawman of his position. His reference to lobsters is only meant to highlight the fact that hierarchies are not a new human or an even particularly capitalist invention. His point is that they’ve existed even within the nervous systems of prehistoric animals ie; the lobsters. He neither defends it or opposes it…he merely states the fact of its existence to people who want to tear down the idea of hierarchies because from their perspective the whole concept is an evil western capitalist invention.
@@iamdanielmonroe And, putting aside that his description of how lobsters behave is apparently incorrect, and especially his citation of how serotonin affects lobster brains is relevant to how serotonin affects the drastically student human brains, that's his response whenever someone asks him something along the lines of whether or not people are wrong to want to try to change the current systems, making it a deflection tactic that says nothing.
It also has absolutely nothing to do with actual Evolutionary Psychology other than him incorrectly describing lobster biology instead of citing works of fiction as is his normal modus operandi.
Dan, you are metal, as always 🤘🏻❤️ data smashes dogma 😈
haha the response at 1:40 is all we needed
Please keep these stitches of J.P. coming!
Tangentally related question to how later Christians interpreted thing
I've seen a fair amount of apologetics that say when in Isaiah it says "I make evil" the word used there is also used for things like natural disasters and thus the passage is only talking about those kinds of things. Is there truth to that, or is it just apologetic sleight of hand?
I'm a big fan of snakes. Both in that I am extremely fond of them and also I am both tall and wide.
Drop the mic dan!!!!!!!...BOOM🎤
Nice x-men shirt. And Jordan has on a nice suit. This is a very well dressed CZcams video.
Taking on Jordan Peterson is really punching down.
If Peterson truly has become popular with evangelicals, I'm honestly a little surprised. They typically like a straight-forward, literalist view of the text, right? I would have thought that evangelicals would reject Peterson's more "creative", metaphorical interpretation. Perhaps they just find him politically or socially useful?
I think that’s a really good point. Interestingly, evangelicals have done this for decades with C.S. Lewis. The guy is their patron saint of apologetics and yet he thought most (if not all) of the Old Testament was myth.
Dan just brought the hammer there at the end.......
I liked Jordan Peterson for about five minutes, especially before i deconverted from Christianity. Once he really got popular in certain circles and he started going off the deep end and spouting things outside his expertise and knowledge I fairly quickly stopped paying attention to him.
He's almost like a neo- William F Buckley Jr
It also doesn't say that Adam and Eve was made perfect. Whatever. Points for trying to Jordan Peterson on this one for me, because although he fails miserably at making logical sense of it to me, at least he's choosing to derive some kind of value from it as he always does. I can respect that. Can't say the same for that suit though.
👌🏾
We negotiate with texts to gain knowledge, which was in essence , the pride of interpretation that the snake gave Eve .
Before the fall , there was nothing to interpret, or negotiate. that’s the point of the story- in my interpretation of course. Christ died for believers and non believers. The new covenant is very clear in why/how it predicts a second coming also.
That look at 1:39. I cant stop laughing.
Sooo what do YOU think is a better interpretation of Genesis 2-3 ?
Peterson out here not doing any favors to Jungian's to be honest...
Goodness knows they need all the favours they can get.
Are there any jungians doing favors for themselves?
Jung was racist and pro-fascist. This is why Peterson kisses his gravestone.
If you put two children in a room with a cake and tell them not to eat it, guess what? It's your effing fault when they do eat it.
But according to Jeepersen, the cake is inedible. So it’s more like putting the children in a room with a bowling ball and telling them not to eat it.
@@MarcosElMalo2 And yet they ate of the cake and gained the knowledge of good and evil
@@MarcosElMalo2But he was wrong about that. “When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. “
Interestingly, the serpent seems to be trying to appeal to Eve's pride, but that's not exactly why Eve eats the fruit, and even less so with Adam.
I like seeing Dan taking on clowns like Peterson rather than rando tiktokkers or whatever. Peterson's nonsense at least comes with some unearned status and "credibility" that Dan can shatter with -- in this case -- a baffled smirk, followed by the reasoning that supports said smirk. Watching Dan engaging with, especially when it becomes a back and forth, pitiful nitwits who are out of their depth just feels sad.
Jung and Archetypes ...everywhere
Well, he needn’t burden himself too much with this effort; if Trump and white evangelicals have already shown us how easily & even eagerly they are to be grifted.
Oh I love that you called him out as a grifter.
This is a much better look for Dan, when he opposes influential speakers. Some of his videos, where he is opposing some guy in his mom's basement, are like shooting a cannon at a mosquito.
Years ago I liked Paterson a lot and I owe it him that I started link up more idea and topics. Since he was so very sick he has come back as a believer it seems. Rationality flies out window. Early Peterson before he got sick is useful.
Maybe on his 12 rules advice (I'd question that), but he was always off the wall with his takes on current events philosophy, and his interpretations of the Heroes Journey
@@rugbyguy59 like I said, look at him 5 years ago and before.
@@nancyhope2205 He came into prominence by lying about a hate speech law.
@@matthewgagnon9426 yeah, it was too much for him. He became inflated and then broke down.
@@rugbyguy59What, do you think that “refusing the grandma’s pubic hair” isn’t part of the heroic cycle? That’s one of the major turning points.
Concerning the 'toiling laboriously for food'. I've thought for a while god created man to be his gardener. Would like to know if there is a "why" god created man in genesis, or a school of thought about that.
Er muh gosh.. those blue shoes and clown suit 🤦♂️🤡😭
Please do more videos addressing Peterson's Bible grifting. People who just make shit up and speak it authoritatively need to be taken down a notch and viewed through the lens of discretion.
I’ve always thought that JP uses his apparent “Christian” beliefs as a method to get a lot of people on board to his way. Very much like what everyone who is a supposed “Christian” does to but in a different way.
Things like hypocrisy, dogma, self serving and delusion is the order of the day.
Dan McClellan drinking game:
1 drink every time Dan says etiology.
1/2 drink every time Dan says laughable/laughably.
Sip on "the fit today is." Full drink if said fit is not a comic book character. Sip on "OK, let's see it."
Sip gin on "gin/ginned up".
1:40 That's what I did when I heard it too.
I wonder if inference is actually taught in biblical and religious learning avenues. It doesn't seem like it is. A considerable amount of literature is actually very symbolic, and even Jesus uses parables and stories to tell a greater tale, which he probably adopted from the ancient Egyptians for the same reason. We can't take everything literally.
Inedible salad...💬🥬
Kermit the Fraud.
Nailed it
I extra
I watched a number of his lectures of mythological psychology before I said a word, then blocked. Only his way or the highway. Same thing with scholars that obviously have not a clue to what Tauroctony symbolizes and don't want to hear any other ideas.