Jordan Peterson - The most PROBLEMATIC intellectual of our time
Vložit
- čas přidán 7. 08. 2024
- Jordan Peterson is easily the most problematic public intellectual of our time. From his assault on the LGBT community (what he calls the post-modern neo-marxist types) to his defense of traditional christian values. I examine it in this video.
One-time support:
UPI: scienceisdope@icici
buymeacoffee.com/scienceisdope
Website: www.scienceisdope.com
Patreon: / scienceisdope_
Discord: / discord
2nd Channel: / @ddrational_
Merch: kadakmerch.com/collections/sc...
#Jordan
#Peterson
#Criticism
Sources
Gender Pay-Gap Paper -
pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/1...
Jordan Peterson vs. Matt Dillahunty -
• Does God Exist? Jordan...
Psilocybin induced Smoking Cessation -
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
Bill C-16
www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en...
Chapters
00:00 - Jordan Peterson
03:20 - Impressionable Young Men & the Gender Pay-Gap
09:20 - Peterson on Religion
19:23 - Bill C-16
24:20 - Sadhguru of the West
27:31 - The Value of Jordan Peterson
Patrons/members that support me at the highest tiers:
Nithin V Nath
BulletproofDuck
nvme978
Sarvesh Kulkarni
Dr. Kirat Tulaskar
Harsha
MD Mudassir Hussain
Loveen Vuppala
Animesh Chaudhary
Wesley Potts
AV
Abhilash
Nate Hand
NEIL MHATRE
Eryk Thompson
Vivek Balasubramanian
Rags H
Jeevan
Sumana Gopinath
Dolly Dasilva
jeethendra d
khujema katleri
Muffin Man
Vedamoorthy Namasivayam
sihoinvi
Sparsh Kumar
Divyaa Srinivasan
DarkSkies
Vinod Gopalakrishnan
Jamila Koshy
Dee Boudreau
Jatin Sharma
Shyam Katnagallu
Alden D'Souza
Arun Kumar
Yudhister Satija
Sri S
Selvakumar Jawahar
Kiran CJ
Prachet Verma
Suds Mekathotti
tariq sharif
Dev Agrawal
Thinking Humanist
Dheeraj
Viswanathan Gopalan
Wrichik Basu
Music Credits:
True Messiah - DJ Freedem
Follow me on social media:
Instagram: / scienceisdope_
Twitter: / scienceisdope_
CZcams: / scienceisdope
Reddit: / scienceisdope - Zábava
Support me at:
Buymeacoffee: buymeacoffee.com/scienceisdope
Patreon: www.patreon.com/scienceisdope_
YT Membership: czcams.com/channels/g--ENXdDpXh5LyLigolg2g.htmljoin
UPI: scienceisdope@icici (QR Code available on www.scienceisdope.com/support )
Man , it feels wierd and illogical but I believe I'm a conservative Athiest. The reasoning for my position is quite complex (wierd) but logical to me in a way.
Either this comes because I was born in a conservative religious family or it's because of my intimate human nature.
Who is Jordan Peterson ?
@@fictionsolosanyverseyounam7599 conservativeness comes from emotion every person is conservative by emotion but if you use logic you will not be conservative so use logic instead emotion
@@motherisape where do you get that reasoning buddy? I find conservatives are more ruthless than liberals.
Thank you so much Pranav for making this video... I have seen many people who are atheist/rationalist fall for him...
The biggest problem is not Peterson or any other "guru" or "influencer" figure. The problem is people who have extreme views and think they know more than they actually do, and only consume content that feeds their point of view. They see everything as black or white. Most things are nuanced and often multi-faceted. One needs and open mind, a logical brain, an empathetic heart, and a desire to seek balance.
Empathy literally has no value when logic is at play
@@jeanniemaycrawford4466 Theoretically yes! But when it comes to most human interactions, you need a blend of empathy and logic, with one weighing in heavier than the other depending on the particular circumstance. Otherwise people would be either histerical empaths or inhumane robots.
@@peacetoall1858 sure, if human interaction is involved, you could possibly be right
But the dude is speaking to his audience through his videos, there's no point for empathy when he's trying to make others espouse his logic
@@jeanniemaycrawford4466 I was talking about general life. As for this specific case, I would argue that his "logic" isn't pure logic. His views have come about as a consequence of his environment(real and virtual), experiences, interactions, internal and external reflections, and a lot more. That means his "logic" is not pure and is indeed (for lack of a better word) tainted with emotion. Part of that emotion is certainly empathy toward the men he addresses. Again, I'm not saying he's right or wrong, but while what he says may seem logical to some, it may not to others. Which means it's not pure logic, as pure logic can't be argured against by anyone who isn't an obstuse imbacile. So the point is that he's not trying to "make others espouse his logic". He's trying to convey his thoughts and "feelings" on whatever subject he's on about in his vidos and interviews. Sorry about the long post, I just like to be clear.
I agree with you in the general sense that the problem isn't Peterson. But fundamentally, what you're promoting is indistinguishable from agnosism and pluralism. So where do we move from here?
Dr. Peterson was a great help to me when I was in depression through his videos. He compelled me to do the right thing and work on myself. And I am grateful for that.
The real problem started when he started giving opinion about everything from history, religion, gender politics and everything under the sun. Being a girl initially I was too, sympathetic towards his views on feminism because I thought we have achieved everything for women. Then I realised it's not true for women in many countries like middle East and South Asia.
My thought is that we should not allow an expert of one field to detect narrative on other unrelated fields. It's simply stupid.
When has JP tried to discredit women's movement in middle east/SE Asia?
@@EvilSapphireR I don’t know if he has done it specifically but dismissing feminist movement as a whole kind of also dismisses around the world
@@beactivebehappy9894 it doesn't. I'm far from a JP fanboy, but criticising a movement as vast and global as feminism doesn't mean invalidating the success some localised versions of it achieve. JP specifically criticises the western version of feminism as it stands today, and its never ending crusade to appropriate victimhood for women even when there is none. Eastern/Western societies are vastly different with very different religious/social/gender dynamics, and conflating criticism of one with the other is a myopic thing to do. Just because one points out disenfranchisement of men in the west doesn't mean he's against improved rape laws in India.
@@beactivebehappy9894 JP doesn't dismiss feminism at all, I'd say he's a feminist himself, you should've heard about him helping many women out in their lives and how he's trained then to do better, his criticism is most against the extremists
Exactly this is what is happening. Earlier only film celebrities were in this position where they were asked every topic under the sun. Now people from other field who eventually become social media celebrities are facing this.
Dude. I appreciate your honesty. I think there are many who take Jordan Peterson extremely seriously without digging any further. Especially because people like Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson are much more visible than a Slavoj Žižek or a Sam Harris, it is not encountered either. I think there are several lessons to be learned from this: 1 - Just because someone speaks calmly and convincingly doesn't mean someone is right. And 2 - What is the agenda of someone with certain points of view?
You described observational assessments of the act, which I believe is called, discernment.
OH MAN! right?
One of the most ignorant aspects of his behavior is how he treats people when they ask him questions or when questions are posed about two opposing parties in a debate. He dismissively tells them that they are wrong, such as when he claimed someone was not an atheist despite their assertion. This can be quite disconcerting, as Jordan, being a clinical psychologist, should possess better conversational skills given his background in psychology. It is truly frustrating, and similar to Ben Shapiro, he resorts to talking quickly and talking over others in order to "win" the argument and create the illusion of being correct.
While I hold a degree in psychology, I do not possess the same scholarly knowledge that Jordan does. However, he could easily accommodate others by simply asking for their name when engaging in conversation. If individuals use their preferred pronouns at work, it would be simple for him to acknowledge and respect their choices. If he struggles with pronouns during conversation, he could bypass his ignorance by using the person's name instead. In every debate he partakes in, he stubbornly maintains that he is right, regardless of the circumstances.
Speaking calmly and convincingly is a) how you should present yourself in a debate which is something others he faces don't do nearly as well if at all. b) him speaking convincingly using logic and reason and then others using their own logic and reason to ponder what he's saying, is why it may seem people take him seriously.
Because he has intelligent things to say rather than saying there is a one word answer for injustice across the globe.
We forgetting he's also a psychologist and has an authoritative say on many of these matters especially the GPG?
I honestly think his intention is to save the world and prevent it from repeating atrocities. He seems pretty self important, but maybe he should, because he's damn powerful. i feel pretty confident in that assessment. I doubt he crafted all of these ideas to conceal his bigotry.
@@Big_Tough_Guy Most people who don't have an ideology and aren't listening to what he's saying already angry at everything he stands for, come to similar conclusions you have made.
I was ready to disagree with you based on the title, but you've made some great arguments against JP views on religion, climate change, etc.
But I have to disagree with your assertion that he's the "the most problematic intellectual of our time". The advice on psychology, putting your house in order, how to think, etc. is absolutely invaluable to a young mind.
As critical thinkers, we have to always be careful to not throw the baby out with the bathwater. People are complicated, not all their views are consistent, not every belief is defensible with randomized controlled trials or double-blinded peer-reviewed studies. Right or left is almost never completely right or wrong, there is always a nuance in the middle. And understanding that nuance should be our goal.
1.5 million subs 🙀
The reality is that almost everyone that follows JP does so because of his politics and not because of his self-help. And his politics are awful, misogynistic, homophobic & sexist.
But what arguments did he make ..... he is just lying ?
@@PreetvndI can bet you cannot even tell the meaning of the terms you used. He improved the lives of millions of women of all age groups. Better you learn to think
@@Preetvndso?
Word salad is Peterson's favourite dish
You just didn't have that capability to understand them.
@@stravinskyfanonly lobsters can
@@stravinskyfan but first you'll have to tell....what do you mean by "you", what do you mean "didn't", what do you mean by "have", what do you mean by "capability", what do you mean by "understand", what do you mean by "them"
@@neerajvashisht5364lmao😂
@@mynnkkk I've watched his debates with Dillahunty and Harris so many times that i can almost recite them verbatim. This is because I have taken the position of "If it sounds like word salad to me, but makes perfect sense to, and has improved the lives of millions of other people, sheer probability would indicate that I'm the one who doesn't understand what's being said."
What petersin haters seem not to notice is their disdain for him. It's not that he simply doesn't make sense to them, if that was the case they'd just ignore him and get on with life. There's this apparent desire to attack him and show outright agression to him whenever possible. Anyone with a psychology background knows that aggression toward someone is a threat response. You don't show such illwill to someone unless they pose some kind of threat to you. I guess what I'm saying is that people's hatred toward Jordan Peterson is an acknowledgement that you feel threatened by him
Pranav, how dare you call out a guy whom I base my whole personality upon? I spend 15 hours a day defending guys and girls who say bad things about Jordan. I refuse to entertain any opposing viewpoints, even though I have never ventured into the real world or engaged in meaningful conversations with women. I am inclined to believe that all women are merely after money and that any mention of feminism is just a product of ignorance. I am content in my self-proclaimed "sigma" bubble, where I consider myself superior and label others as "beta males." Please refrain from challenging my beliefs, as I am quite comfortable in this delusion. Whenever I come across a feminist post on Instagram or any discussion about equal rights, I automatically dismiss it and brand the person as uneducated. I arrogantly consider myself the most knowledgeable person in the world. Additionally, I use terms like "L" and "L generation" to degrade others, and I misuse the term "feminist" as if it were an insult. In my own little world, I believe I have solved all my problems, which is why I feel the need to meddle in other people's lives and make derogatory comments like "LGBT is unnatural" or "It's not biological." I perceive myself as the center of the universe, and everything revolves around me.
Dude your sarcasm 😂
😂😂
Butthurt right winger crying after reading this 😂
Right winger crying after reading this 😂
Damn, You destroyed the manosphere guys like Andrew Tate. 🤣🤣🤣
The most hilarious thing about peterson was his debate with zizek. Peterson tells people to read 800 pages worth of reference books before putting forward their argument.. and he hadn't even read the communist manifesto
Peterson not only read the communist manifesto, but understands it deeply.
Zizeks objections to Peterson were that he wasn't directly quoting the communist manifesto and was instead presenting the implications of it.
Remember when you were in high school and the teacher told you to "write it in your own words"? That's to show that you actually understand the text well enough to express them accurately through your own unique words and perspective.
Wait? You mean the the opposite right? He had read it and analyzed it at great length in the debate. Zizek sidetracked him though since it turned out that he was a strange Marxist
@@jaxwhyland that's not what it came off as.. he refused to actually cite any material at all from the manifesto but wanted to present a grim picture of it. Zizek simply asked about the parts which peterson found objectionable and peterson couldn't come up with anything.
It's a simple book meant for workers for Christ sake.. peterson loves to reference 800 pages thick random books but can't say which parts of CM he was talking about.
@@skumflum3768 lol.. he hadn't. He was describing how he thought the manifesto was.. but didn't say anything from the actual text.
It's like me giving a movie review without actually talking about any plotpoints.
@@pm6127 did you expect him to read it out loud? It was a perfectly reasonable analysis
Calling him an intellectual is like calling Sadguru a scientist.
Cold😱😱
He's way wiser than you will ever be
He is an intellectual, just because you don't agree with him doesn't makes him stupid.
@@jerniganantonym2684 atleast i don't think people need to believe in god to have morality
Nah calling him intellectual means calling Muhammad pdfile 😂
I don’t think Jordan Peterson is trying to be needlessly confusing with his speech. He has always come across to me as sincere and genuine. I relate a lot to the way that he thinks and gets caught up in semantics. It’s hard for me to understand when people say that he just uses wordplay and has some hidden agenda. I think his beliefs are entirely genuine, but I think it would be beneficial if he used more conventional definitions and frameworks.
No, he is not. It's bullshit word salad. His fans often need help understanding what he's saying. That allows him to sound more intelligent than he is and allows people to project their prejudices and feelings onto whatever he's saying.
Style, confidence, intelligence. Important characteristics to attract consumers. Probably why he has become a successful businessman.
Watch his interview with Alex O’Connor, he is a grifter.
Did you even watched the video he literally say climate change is not real gender wage gape is not real and is against gay marriage. And thing people can't have morality without believing in religion
This was eye opening!
Thanks for sharing, Pranav
What helps me is, I try to not follow anyone (not even you. Although, I am subscriber :D).
Rather, I try to follow advise that are actionable to my life. That way, I can test them and form an opinion/tweak my interpretations myself.
I definitely like - 'thinking = writing'. It does help me be more articulate.
I also like 'clean your room' - I see people (very close friends and family) who gives advices that they themselves don't follow.
Bit of a stretch to call him an intellectual
What is shocking and dangerous about JP is that he uses his psychology degree to bring credibility to the Christian worldview. I was obsessed with Peterson when he posted self-help lectures at the beginning, I was turning to atheism during this time and I thought it was odd that he was constantly synthesising Bible verses into his reading of post modern social dynamics. If I didn't have atheism to temper JP's influence I would've ended up a rabid, co-dependant fan-boy and would've never caught the misuse of Psychology and re-assessed post-modernism . Christianity like most religion has been very anti-science and post-modernism relies largely, if not entirely, on the might of science to bring positive and sustainable changes to society. So I completely understand why a closeted Christian would be against post-modernism.
Science and religion can't co-exist. One uses old ideas while other is continuously discovering new ones. I f you see anyone trying to link them, they must be upto something.
Exactly my thoughts
He is a conservative and so many people in India especially men are watching these videos of him and ben shapiro. I see people from India talking about woke and men right activist. It has already seeped in society
@@urooj09 I think that this sentiment was already there in indian society as we are comparatively WAY more patriarchal than the west. JP has simply given legitimacy to their pre-existing beliefs and they feel more emboldened to wear it on their sleeve. The internet somehow amplifies what people already think.
I think the main reason he was attacked he spoken against gender transition surgery of minors and promotions of homosexuality in western schools and thats why his twitter was suspended, tbh there’s nothing wrong if someone stand for protection of childrens from gender politics, even though I admire this channel work this video is completely biased
This man Peterson is just so confident about whatever he speaks. It os this conviction that confused his opponents. However the only time I saw his tactics failed was when his opponent was Salvoj Zizek. That debate is really amazing.
I just can't tolerate Zizek's accent. I've personally found it to be really disturbing. I can't listen to the guy for more than 5 mins lol 😅💀
I’m half-Slovenian. I don’t mind Zizkek’s accent, but I find him somewhat uncouth.
Man no one could do what zizek did to Peterson in that debate.
Have you watched Dillahunty's conversation with Peterson? Worth a watch
Hi Pranav, would you be able to make a video on your observations on the pay gap? either the article or other citations? Good day.
“I have figured out a way to monetise the Social Justice Warriors”- Jordan Peterson on the Joe Rogan podcast
Well, if I'd wish for one breakthrough, it would be that. Unironically the pinnicale of modern archievment.
Sadguru of the west is so accurate.
Both talk of just enough of motivation to strap you in, to then take you for a ride with their misinformation and prejudice
Yes, they are so good at the strapping in part. Extraordinary even.
Woi JP baba
What prejudice and misinformation?
Peterson isn't an intellectual he's a rank opportunist.
Please debunk Sudhanshu Trivedi, He is making pseudoscientific claims on every platform
Even a person with the least understanding will cross check his claims before accepting.
Never heard of him. Who is this guy?
He already did 2 - 3 short videos in his second channel.
@@girdharsingh4287 Hindu sceince minister.
That clown should not get any footage
It just occurred to me how much childhood emotional neglect can lead one to the horrors of Jordan Petersen fandom. He talks constantly about how young men aren’t seen, validated, or told they have inherent worth and their feelings matter.
If your parents never provided those things, then those points will resonate with you. Throw in psychological patriarchy where these young men get mocked, bullied or ostracized for expressing their feelings or being vulnerable and it just makes it worse
His opinion on climate change especially is so ignorant, it's absolutely infuriating
I went through the same transitions as you, I was also an atheist from India, who got hugely influenced by the “intellectual dark web”. Now I know better
Do you? Or have you fell into another trap. Maybe time will tell.
@@82abhilashexactly. It’s amazing how little self awareness people have.
If you are the type of person to be hugely influenced by one group then chances are you are still able to be hugely influenced by another. To say you now know better is a deeply naive thing to say.
@@soulfuzz368It's the difference between believing someone at his word, and doing the actual fact check. Fact check Peterson, and a lot of what he's saying turns out to be, at best ill informed or at worst a lie.
@@harrynac6017 I agree but I would extend this level of criticism to all media personalities. Fame and attention makes liars of us all. Is there some other media guru you think speaks only the truth and deserve the attention and fame they receive?
JP is a politician rather than an intellectual and it is east to be confused between a politician and an intellectual. As both use speech to justify their truth, whereas an intellectual is the one who is willing to be wrong, unbiased and change his views for the better.
Am I the only one who never really believed in god
Nope.
Hey Pranav, love you videos. I am just wondering if you would make a video on book called "skeptics guide to universe". I think anyone who would love to learn Critical thinking outside of CT class, its magnificient book. 10/10 recommned it to everyone.
It's so refreshing to see such a balanced take on this by an Indian youtuber. I'm genuinely impressed by your way of articulating yourself. Looking forward to seeing more such content!
I too am someone who has gone down the rabbit hole of watching too many Jordan Peterson videos. His eloquent manner of talking overpowers the fact that some of the arguments he makes are purposefully framed in a vague yet intellectual sounding way. The statistics he quotes often tend to be from studies with smaller sample sizes, and even then he only quotes the statistics which are in line with his personal views. And yet he makes his audience believe that anyone who doesn't agree with him simply doesn't want to accept reality (and just needs to clean their room 💀)
I still do occassionally listen to him, because of course I love his eloquent manner of speaking, plus I still think there is a lot I can learn from him. It's also beneficial to listen to convincing arguments for things that you disagree on to really question why you disagree with these things in the first place.
Would you perhaps also consider making a video about some of his claims in the field of psychology? For example he once mentioned that he doesn't believe in the Multiple Intelligence Theory. I would love to hear your perspective on that.
Also I would love to hear your perspective on gender-affirming care for minors, trans people in sports and gender dysphoria (it's included in the diagnostic and statistical manual for mental disorders)
Hey Pranav,
What is a Woman?
hahahahaha
Opinion.
What do you mean by 'what is'?
As an intellectual atheist, I'd love to hear you science based opinion on trans women in women's sports.
What of it? There are cis women in sports with high testosterone. You know that right?
Yes😂, i wanna see his scientific explanation on so called LGBTQ as well
@@nixombie
no he wont do that he has a particular way of operating as far as i have seen he slants a particular way in analysis.
@@loyisad1211 wow, if you knew anything about human endocrinology, you'd know that even high levels of natural testosterone in young women can't rival, low levels of testosterone in old men... plus a few months of being on castration meds doesn't negate the advantages gained from a lifetime of high testosterone levels.
Good video, I am off to disorganize my room
You should look around right wing youtuber in india , because they are now becoming famous and giving half bake fact and scientific terminology to justify their view.
for example :some Vedic channel(veducation/jaipurdialogue )said ramsetu is said to 5000yr old by asi(so they assume to be build by Shri Ram) and said so why not look at Vedic text that said ramsetu
Is older than million year so hence proved ramsetu is build million year old , they say it in a such way that this point will get accepted who adores shri ram ,and in such way they also glorify patriarchy with such explanation.
🙏sorry if you are not interested in this type of video , because I can understand it will be more controversial, but I don't want to stop you ,you have given me whole new perspective,I am religious but i believe it is so personal and it should not harm other , because it is base on faith not science.
No jaipur dialogue is great channel they alway speak about facts and ved education also speak logicly .you cannot understand about Vedas like them.
Whenever I listen to Jordan Peterson all I hear is noise .
He is western Deepak Chopra. Both are player of words and excellent individuals who can teach us How to debate without actual logic.
Not to miss Sam Harris eta JK on live debate.
lol
Sam is weird. No god but does meditation which derives directly from eastern religions.
Ham Sarris can look convincing debating anything under the sun, since his logic matches with 19 year old internet atheist
@@gnanasabaapatirg7376 Meditation is less about religion tho
I used to like him before. He just talks endlessly without saying anything.
A decade ago I found his clips on fixing my life. A clear perspective on everyday things, handling emotions, taking responsibility. A beacon of hope and encouragement in a constantly ignorant world. Instant fanhood.
Years passed and his popularity grew, but his opinions went from Psychology lessons to literally everything he could get his hands on, especially socio-political and socio-economic issues. He went too far with his aspirations and fell to appeasing conservative frat boys. His arguemts became very polarising, as he started mixing his Christian Dogma with his established worldview. A rational person could see a new-found pattern of word salad with no logic. It was just a matter of time that his Right Wing bubble would burst, and it did. He got destroyed by Zizek in one of the most important debates in recent history. Rewatching his clips today gives no sense of credibility.
So yea, he's not the same man we were once fond of. He gives the vibe of a boomer uncle in his echo chamber.
wow. perfectly put.
I am not aware of his religion based discussion, but the way western elites are promoting homosexuality is insane, the main reason why his twitter was suspended because he taken stand against gender transition surgery of minors and its promotion by hollywood celebrities and there’s nothing wrong in it, western elites are also promoting their own dogma on name of feminism and gender identity politics
Power corrupts everyone
I watched the Zizek decade a couple of months ago.
And I disagree he destroyed Peterson.
Both made good points.
That's more of like human psyche,
You and I follow someone and then get a kick out of saying that that person has lost it...
He has just become popular.
That's pretty much all that has happened.
His opinions are as informed as they were a couple of years ago.
You have just lost your ability to find value in what Peterson and Zizek were saying.
They both made awesome points.
@@avisharma4576 lol you have been fangirlling over Peterson under this video with your comments, I really had no urge to reply to it, yet you come and tell me that I am getting a "kick" out of the fact he lost OR I don't have the "ability" to understand their greatness 🤡
I can say you're projecting the same "lack of understanding" that you accuse me of.
Peterson's entire new-found personality has been about an invisible enemy - the post-modernist cultural marxists, yet when Zizek asks him that what does he know about these so called Marxists, JP said he doesn't understand Marxists as he hasn't read much about their beleifs, which means he's been locking horns with an entity he has no idea about. The entire debate is polite but Zizek wins and JP loses.
Cope Harder
Loved the video ❤
Just somethings I wanted to point out
1) I think you didn't actually refute the claim that he made at 23:15 in the video
2) I don't think he said or meant at 13:25 what you condensed his statement to
Bro so should we verify the information he provides in his personality and maps of meaning lecture series too, or can we take his word for it, assuming that if he is teaching the subject at a university, he would know what he is talking about and wouldn't spread misinformation that suits his agenda?
You are a breath of fresh air. I Appreciate your video.
You are looking at this from Indian perspective which is incorrect. You don't know what is going here in politics in the name of LQBT rights, trans issues, etc etc. And Peterson argument against Bill B-16 was that it could potentially force individuals to use specific pronouns or language that they disagreed with or found objectionable specially when there can be any number of pronouns. And comparing him with Sadhguru was just dumb. My advice would be to focus more on the religious scriptures, practices and not the politics.
@@tathagatquandaliusganesh1082 Because he doesn't understand it.
bill C 16 doesn't EVEN speak about pronouns. www.utpjournals.press/doi/full/10.3138/utlj.2017-0073#:~:text=Bill%20C%2D16%20adds%20the,specific%20references%20to%20gender%20pronouns.
Jordan fans really need to see this
I mean as far as LGBT goes , JPs right .
This channel is using feelings instead of science .
Why should society consider a man who has male characteristics and XY chromosomes to be a lady .
This creator uses rationality only when it suits his agenda
Never knew Peterson was this silly 😂😂
Oh from this video you got to understand he's silly and from previous one's you saw you had different idea? Guess where the issue is?
@@abdulwarees840 i didn't saw all the previous ones Abdul. Plus I had a puncture in my bike.
Because he's not.
@@vaibhavkaushik2966 This is what I don't like about you arrogant liberal atheist types. You call Peterson a Racist/Transphobe/whatnot and feel good about yourselves and then you proceed to make bad taste communal jokes like that you made to Abdul, hypocrite much?
@@vaibhavkaushik2966I get that reference 😂.
Good work Pranav! JP is a big influence among young Indian men in a negative way. I see a lot of young men becoming misogynists these days.
Thank you!!
so watching jp is misogyny? in what context? wtf is wrong with you bro
@Kai 🏳️🌈 ⃠卍 😢you are so naive and cute
My Alpha boi 🤭
@Kai 🏳️🌈 ⃠卍 you are so alpha
That you need to be misandrist to gain attention
In what way does Jp advise(not his politics) making Indian men misogynist ????
Maybe you watched those out of context clips of him and anyways enjoy your eco chamber.
JP: I believe in Christainity.
Also JP: What do u mean by Believe???
Peterson is definitely not the most problematic intellectual, because in order to be a problematic intellectual, you must first be an intellectual.
Sad u r not getting sponsor.....I'm an unemployed viewer and can't support ur channel financially but keep telling friends about your videos that's the only support I can give right now.... please keep going 💟
Same here😢
Obviously stupid people are unemployed. Get a job man leave philosophy until you get one.
I am amazed at how we had almost the exact same journey. Loved the video!
Same here, I'm so relieved to find out that there are people who are really rational. His audience is amazing. A comment section where you can scroll through without bumping into stupids. 😂
@@amityadav-lt5bc Yes.
"What sane person wouldn't want equal rights for all groups and individuals especially if given them rights wouldn't take anything away from you?"
Most societal problems would be avoided if only everyone would adopt this fairly obvious principal, but unfortunately this isn't the case. There's always going to be selfish people out there that don't want equality or everyone to live good lives.
Not to bring humans are just another species of animals and in general may like to use their physical or social advantages to take advantage of the weaker groups or people , am I really wrong? I am highly doubting if these -selfish- people are a half if not majority of humans, at least today.
JP never denied the existence of gender pay gap, he just implied that radical means for eradicating gender pay gap might be at the expense of people's own free choice.
He literally denied its existence (when you control for variables of course). I have his quote in the video. Also the paper I linked shows that a paygap exists even when you control for those variables
@@scienceisdopeWell, he never denied the gender pay gap. Let me explain:
He said that it doesn't exist in the context that Cathy was proposing, that was, basing patriarchy as the sole reason behind the existing gender pay gap. His argument was that there are multiple factors behind why women on average earn less than men, it's not just patriarchy or prejudice towards women.
He literally said in the next line "Women in aggregate are paid less", then he goes on explaining all the factors.
@@scienceisdope
JP didn't deny wage gap as you are claiming falsely(the quote of his in the video that you are referring to has a context to what Cathy was saying that pay gap is purely because of gender - "women are being dominated by men in pay" - which is what he countered with it's not purely because of gender, removing this context is called distorting facts which is what you did), he only said there are multiple factors causing that gap and one of which is gender but the proportion of the gender factor is much smaller in the overall gap than radical feminists claim. Literally quoting him, "I didn't deny it existed, I denied it existed because of gender". I think you got confused between the correlation-causation fallacy. Wage gap observed between men vs women - correlation(correlation of lower wages with women and correlation of higher wages with men on an average/median). Wage gap exists purely because they are men or women - causation.
next, at 7:40, I think the measured variables that are controlled in the research paper results illustrated in the figures and tables are not exhaustive of what JP was referring to in that interview wrt the multivariate equation explaining the wage gap (eg. psychological factors like agreeableness, etc.). You can also find this thing as a kind of disclaimer in the research paper you mentioned as below that it needs more proper research(i.e. in field settings rather than lab settings) on these psychological factors to explain the 'wage gap'.
www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w21913/w21913.pdf - refer section 4 and subsections, also page 50 2nd para ("Psychological attributes or noncognitive skills...")
So, this research paper neither proves wage gap exists purely based on gender discrimination(remember correlation not equal to causation), at least in developed nations, nor does it prove that JP was wrong nor it proves Cathy N. was right.
I understand he didn't give any research source he was referring to while making those statements. However, based on the research paper you claimed he was probably referring to was also misrepresented by you in the context of what he said as explained above. I think you either didn't listen to the interview intently or did some twisting of the words JP said like mainstream media does usually and got misunderstanding of what exactly he said then did the above misrepresented referall to the research paper. I suggest you to watch that interview again with more focus on each word he says.
Please watch below video to get more understanding/perspectives on the wage gap explanation:
czcams.com/video/W6IBFpVZIIE/video.html&ab_channel=BigThink
@@bigdamnhero4982ucks how pranav doesn't reply when backed into a corner. Makes him look like the people he 'debunks'
@@ofAwxen ikr
I've become such fan of your work. Just unable to renew membership using UPI 😢
I love the move towards the video essayist style of content
His views on climate change are the most problematic. 3 of my juniors in college quoted Mr. Peterson and told me Climate Change is not real. They wouldn’t even listen to reason because of how polarising his content is.
Just one thing to ask,Is it violation of my free speech if I am Compelled by "law" To Speak a specific word That a specific human with Special rights prefers??
This is one of your best videos in recent times Pranav !! Keep up the good work!
Why is my comment getting removed?
What did u write
Hate speech is generally censored by YT
Surya i saw you on vimoh's channel
First time I have seen a video of yours, really enjoyed it, love your work.
Hi Pranav. I found your channel after searching for "indian mythology scam?' because I forgot the name Praveen. I find most of view-points very interesting and although I may not agree with all of them, I enjoy the intellectual confusions you force me into. Keeps me thinking and forces an retrospection, which I enjoy. Regarding the topic of JP in this video, I too watch (still) talks of him, Shapiro and such, and I think most of the right wing vs left wing disputes in the west hardly affects us in India; but some points like gender ideology, and the trans issue, do. As far his thoughts on atheism or christianity, I have no thoughts as I simply do not care about them. I take what I want fromhis speeches, and make my own inferences after I have done my own study on the matter, whichever that may be. Apologies as I may have not written everything well, as I think I have difficulty articulating all my thoughts into text.
Thank God that somebody said something about this man. He has been giving Gyan like there's no tomorrow. And I don't even understand most of the things he says. Same with Andrew Huberman.
This is because of his Great English vocabulary he looks like someone intellectual nd then he mix matches his word ( word salad ) so that most of audience doesn't even focus on what he is saying but just blindly agree with his stand
@@mynnkkk He's exploiting the whole Big words=definitely correct mentality of the commoners.
@@mynnkkk similar to shapiro " say things fast and confuse people "
@@mynnkkk freedom of thought is such a wonderful thing. And I love how this community of nonconformist, logical & rational thinkers is growing.
@@alpeshmittal3779 exactly, these guys also cleverly use logical fallacies like "Strawman" to win arguments
I agree on few points but not fully, love or hate him but he dismisses toxic feminism, trans ideology being pushed on children etc. The one sided gender wage theory etc. People here blaming him taking Christian stories in His discussions but he respects all religions. He used to be an athiest once but seeing extreme ideology did to america and xanada he is slowly shifting towards right wing. Im a woman but i dont agree with toxic feminism. Im not married yet but can you allow your children be exposed to extreme sexual content in the name of education? Why are kids as young as elementary school taught about trans, queer gay lesbian ideologies. Why children encouraged to change their genders with put their parents knowledge? Why are minors transitioned in the name of healthcare. Trans people are allowed in wpmen spaces and sports. People worried about trans feelings but not womens. Im not against trans but it feels weird if you are woman and you are asked to share the same space with someone who is not biologically women. The mockery trans people are doing to women. Is there really no difference between us and them?. The sacrifice we do and pain we go through as soon as we hit puberty till we die. We got reduced to a dress. Just put on lipstick , wear a dress and boom you become a women. This video of pranav really made me sad. I had great hope when he was debunking religious superstitions but not this. You may not agree with all he says but JP is speaking against extreme radical left in west.
Was about to comment the same thing before I saw your comment
I completely agree with you except that JP respects other religions
@@sohailiahos he has definitely spoken good about Islam. He is yet to have a dialogue with Hindu. Also many people are saying he is closeted Christian but for many years he disregarded Christianity. He never said he is Christian but he tells some of the stories of the Bible to explain a few things. He just sees religious books as literature. Anyways you can skip those parts but certainly he is doing a good job in fighting extreme left. You may ask why i am concerned. What is happening in the west can happen in India also tomorrow. Kids are innocent. Just leave them alone 🙏 also as women i cannot agree to stay quiet if someone reduces me as a costume. Thankfully the trans people in India are not as radical as in the west. I respect them because they go through a lot . The ideology is entirely different in the west and it makes me vomit. The pronouns thing, adults turning into kids, animals etc yuck what sort of society is that. Kids undergoing gender surgeries etc. That is certainly not human rights.
@@elena537743 he had recently said some bad things about islam
But that does not mean i dont agree with his other ideologies like you said the things about trans people in West and all that pronounce bullshit I hope all of these stop as soon as possible
@@sohailiahos saying some thing bad doesn't mean he always should praise . We should open to criticism it doesn't make you less believer. If you cannot hear anything against your religion then it's danger. We should criticize what wrong. There are people who do bad from every religion and we should criticize.
@@elena537743 yes I agree but he didn't criticized it he made fun of it I think it was my fault for not phrasing it properly and he also have a photo with one of his fan who is wearing a t-shirt where on the t shirt he printed some nonsense things about islam
(Sorry for bad english I can understand english but I am very bad when it comes to speaking it or typing it)
Title is kind of misleading, i was in dedepression in my teenage. Listening to lectures it really helps me.
What the good thing about your channel pranav is that it saves my lot of time.Usually when I have to form an opinion about something or somebody,I want to do deep research but I don't have much time or energy,by watching you video,I would say I get pretty much idea about the thing or a person.
then you are doing exactly the opposite of what he's suggesting here. accepting someone else's claim without verification
@@raven-888 It is interesting that you pointed out this thing.
But i think there were no scientific claims in this video.
But claims like gender pay gap,C-16,pranav already sited the sources in his discription.
There was not much to verify also,this video was based on "someone" rather than "something".
And his arguments were sound,because I personally have watched many videos of jordern peterson,and I used to thought approx. same about him.
@@user-bb1rn4cc5z Several people have debunked Pranav in the comments but he hasn't responded to any of those comments. How convenient!
Pranav, let me tell you. You are basically me when it comes to the chronology of events that happened with you and who you followed and got influenced by. It was like i was doing self reflection. I'm now exactly where you are right now with my position. Loved the video.
Cheers 😊
He is not self-reflecting. He has made assumptions about the world and probably share his world with people who hold those assumptions. He has not examined his world-view or even properly understand what it is.
@@82abhilash well i never said he was, but what you said might be true. He is only to answer
@@82abhilash How do you know?
@@potts995 read what I have written elsewhere.
I've seen a lot of peterson debunks, this is definitely one of the best. Awesome work, Pranav.
It is not a debunk. It is a criticism. What exactly did he debunk? Nothing. Pranav just put forward his world-view. One that he holds but does not examine. To borrow a term used by Jordan Peterson in this video, Pranav is imposing moral hierarchy, which he assumes that all the viewers share and agree upon.
There is no need to assume that LGBTQ categories are real or if real, then stable. There is no need to assume that protective classes need to be created based on those categories. There is no need to assume that protecting those people that fall within those categories are the greatest moral good. There is no need to assume that those that do that are "civilized" and those who don't are "barbaric". These are components of a belief system. If it is wrong to impose Christianity on those that are unwilling, why is it right to impose this ideology system on anyone?
@@82abhilash yeah it wasn't a debunk, per se. It was a criticism. Everything else you said was wild though.
LGBTQ people do exist and are discriminated against all over the world. Hence, it makes sense to put them in a protected class. That is a moral good, I don't know if it's the greatest moral good but why does it have to be?
And I would say that being against discrimination makes you more civilized and less barbaric for sure.
Don't know what you mean by the last question, not all beliefs are the same. I have no problem imposing anti-discrimination beliefs while being against imposing religious beliefs. That's not hypocritical at all as my goal for society is a more peaceful and tolerant one.
@@Venksama There are labels called LGBTQ, and there are people labelled that way. Some people self-label with those categories. But that does not mean that those labels represent anything real. We have lot of old labels that intelligent people and even scientists believed in the past that have proven to be inadequate of even false. Human beings are social animals. It is very difficult to know if a human being is acting purely on instinct. Which is what makes the LGB labels suspect. For starters they are only found in Western societies, where such categories of people are given special rights. The argument is that they are oppressed in other countries. Again that seems more like a world view that anything else. It may be that some people have depended on those of the same gender for sexual stimulation, but that does not mean that they are some separate category. Some people like to watch birds and some people like to swim. Do we need separate interest groups for that too?
It is an action that people do to better their life. If they are tolerated why not tolerate polygamy and polyandry as well.? Monogamy is a result of Christian indoctrination after all. Also, how far should you tolerate anything? What about people who involve children in such acts and what if the child likes it too? There is an effort now to relabel and normalize pedophilia calling them minor-attracted persons. Now for the T and Q, the new additions, even more problematic. It is just men dressed as stereotypical women to enter private spaces for women.
Now you speak about religious imposition. LGBTQ are part of a religious imposition. It goes by the slang term woke. It has its own theology too. But it is presented as facts and masquerades as science.
Left wing in the western civilization are just mentally unstable people
@@82abhilashThat's just bullshit. LGBTQ is not a " tag" without meaning. It is you who has no idea about science.
Peterson is a businessman. He preys on people's insecurities. So its quite accurate to compare him to Jaggi Vasudev who does the same thing
If you guys want other videos which criticise Jordan Peterson, I can recommend CosmicSkeptic, Vlad Vexler, and Carefree Wandering. All of them professional philosophers and criticise Peterson on different topics.
I don't know the other two guys but Cosmic Skeptic isn't a professional Philosopher LMFAO 😂
@@Nithin_sp According to his website, he is "A graduate of philosophy and theology from St. John’s College, Oxford University". I'm not sure if this qualifies him as a professional philosopher, but given that he's got a degree from one of the best schools in the world, he's certainly not uneducated in philosophy :)
@@Charlie-br8wp Yeah bro, a graduate isn't a professional Philosopher. PhD is generally considered as the threshold to be regarded as a professional Philosopher. The same applies to any field.
@@Nithin_sp I see we differ on our definitions for "professional" philosopher. I won't argue further about that. Still, I stand by my recommendation :)
@@Charlie-br8wp Cool! 😊👍🏻
I'm so relieved to find out that there are people who are really rational. Your audience is amazing. A comment section where you can scroll through without bumping into waves of stupids. 😂
Yeah consider it a safe space ❤️
the thing is that half the world thinks you are stupid too. What you described is an echo chamber which is used to propagate confirmation bias in people. This guy pranav claimed the covid vax was safe when it came out, but only after its use, people started dying of random heart attacks. There was a detailed study on Cardio myopathy by an independent doctor from John Hopkins, yet this guy pranav just trolled Djokovic instead of getting into the science of vaccines. Because that would expose him right away. Both the left and right are fooling people left right and center. He is no different when it comes to serving the companies who are funded by the left. As for Peterson, he is a great psychiatrist and a doctor. But I wouldn't take religious advice from him. Its that simple. Social medias job is to confuse the people with opinions. Thats it.
I too feel relieved here.
@@zany4132 or an echo chamber ironically
or you can say... an echo chamber of your own world views, delusions and stupidity.
Yeah same here, I was really into him in 2019 and all through 2020 but after he came back from his coma (which I am glad he did) he struck me as something wasn't right and he was leaning more and more towards the alt-right. I slowly stopped keeping up with him as his content became more and more political. The last straw for me was when he defended the Russian invasion of Ukraine. I'm pretty apolitical and people's views don't really bother me but Jordan is way more of a political sensationalist who only stores up controversy and peddles his opinions as facts which is just wrong!
War might never be the right solution but I defend Russia's rights to defend itself.
@@ivorynails i also defend russia's right to occupy ukrainian land and kidnap ukrainian children
man you earned a subscriber, i came across one of your videos and binged a few more of yours, while i do not agree with all your points because i too have certain beliefs and biases, i think you are doing an excellent job of being a critique and showing the other side of coin
Can you make a vidio about why most of the indians brag about things that had never happend?
Idk man unnecessary nationalism
I used to watch Peterson clips and reels just an year ago lol and I found him fascinating at that point. I'm glad I've changed myself a lot since then.
I think the main reason Jordan Peterson was attacked he spoken against gender transition surgery of minors and promotions of homosexuality in western schools and thats why his twitter was suspended, tbh there’s nothing wrong if someone stand for protection of childrens from gender politics, even though I admire this channel work this video is completely biased
@@max-cs9ko true. Apart from Jordan's religious views, i mostly agree with his social outlook.
I still love his work I just don't care about the other stuffs he talks about 🥲
@@max-cs9ko the real problem isn’t even about trans rights
Look the amount of attention people like him are giving to the trans movement in the first place.The more people talk about it more people get exposed to it.Otherwise trans people could have gone by as a small community of people.
Why? Because he is a transphobe? There is no reason to believe that Pranav is less flawed than JP.
He will write an essay to a yes or no question.
Because life is not an mcq exam. Complex Questions require complex answers.
I would like to know your thoughts on Acharya prashant...
There are glaring issues with Peterson, however, this video fails to critic him and does not do justice to him. Genetically Modified Skeptic on the other hand did a wonderful job at his critique, actually countering his points rather than using "he just has complicated wordplay and jargon" fallacy in logic and butchering his viewpoint entirely.
Ciao.
I like JP, even after acknowledging every point you made in the video. Humans are very complex, you don't have to accept each of their belief. You can pick and choose what you want to takeaway or not. You mentioned in the video that you will not take JP by his word after some incident. Well you should not take anyone by word. Its very important to come at your own conclusion. People have beliefs and groups normalize them.
Agree
They Idolize Peterson, and when he then appears to be a flawed human being, suddenly they blame him for not being god like anymore?
Thats silly
I think the main reason Jordan Peterson was attacked he spoken against gender transition surgery of minors and promotions of homosexuality in western schools and thats why his twitter was suspended, tbh there’s nothing wrong if someone stand for protection of childrens from gender politics, even though I admire this channel work this video is completely biased
@@max-cs9ko if he wishes to argue that this is happening, he needs evidence
This idea that children are being transitioned at a young age is a very common one, but it's not something that reflects reality(no, puberty blockers don't count, they were used way before their implementation in trans healthcare to prevent onset of early puberty in women, they have been studied extensively since then)
Moreover, he's a Christian right
So he must've known about the common surgery of circumcision, something done involuntarily on babies without their consent(no, it being harmless is not reason enough, at least with puberty blockers the aim is to minimize any psychological stress and then to stop when the future path becomes clear to progress as per usual)
That's worse than puberty blockers, at least there the children need to be both diagnosed with some kind of condition, and even then they're at least given some choice(especially when they reach an age where they can indeed consent for a surgery if they have retained those tendencies)
Let's not sugarcoat this, it's mutilation
And if he does care about 'irreversible changes that kids go through because of their parents', then he should at least mention his own Christianity's failing in this regard
@@max-cs9ko that's not true at all. None is west is doing gender transition surgery on minors. Heck he even attacked Elliott Paige for having a breast reduction surgery.
@@broeklien3817 Exactly! I think most people hating on JP are actually having also their own demons that cause them to pay attention to things that shouldnt really matter in the long run. You take the positive things out of your surroundings and ignore the negative things. I think that's the best outcome for every human to be able to do so.
Respect to you for keeping an open mind & learning where you went wrong & then correcting.
It is an enormous problem that a large majority of people are impervious to information that contradicts their favored of self serving viewpoints.
Cheers.
Hi Pranav,,, Can you make a video on the scientific basis for Transgenderism and Homosexuality. I always wonder what makes people homosexual or transgender against our natural evolutionary tendency to procreate for survival.
9:20 looks like you are misunderstanding things here because you are atheist. What he is saying that he needs to believe in something that is morally correct in every way. Some people respect god, some love the god or some fear the god. Thats how non-atheist manage their morals. If you listen his other interviews of his on the faith of god you will hear this a lot from him.
Jordan Peterson was great at the beginning with his lectures on personality and maps of meaning, he turned into that chattering religious grandfather over time.
We shouldn't allow expert of one field to detect narrative on other unrelated fields. It just sounds stupid.
I do agree with you that people shouldn't argue on things that are unrelated to their fields. But, theology and philosophy are very much related. Maybe even the same thing, but from different viewpoints. JP has good knowledge in both Philosophy and theology. So, him talking about relegion isn't just some old man without knowledge talking about relegion
Thankfully I missed the first and second waves JP popularity. And only really listened to some of his speeches in 2021 or after (and even then just a few short clips, not whole lectures).
I’m keep myself insulated from sjw debates of the day whatever they may be.
Anyways, when I came across JP, I noticed two things, he claimed to be an academic but would speak with so much authority about any subject in the sun. And I know no human on earth can be a specialist on more than just a few topics. And he spoke with such confidence that my bullshit alarm went off.
The second thing was that if you really just listen to his videos, they’re a whole mess of nothing words. It’s difficult to describe but on a visceral gut instinct, I was like, good or bad, I am going to avoid him.
JP's biggest talent is his charm and that he is a very good speaker. Good language and big words. It impresses people and makes you want to believe him. I have listened to his videos. But me being a feminist found his videos very disappointing after some time. Then i heard him talking about lgbt pronouns but the final nail on the coffin was when he did a q and a with college students on climate change. He just kept talking bullshit, going round and round, nothing that made sense. As you said, he managed to confuse the kids and shut them up and his few supporters were cheering and clapping . But it was obvious that he didn't really know what he was talking about atleast about climate change. But he talked with so much of confidence and advanced vocabulary that i had to rethink all the videos i had seen of him till then. As he has some good general life advice, people tend to take everything he says as advice.
I really appreciate someone who admits that they have grown and evolved and come from a place where you were less educated and are honest about that
yeah but thats only that. Dont think because of such a claim you can take him for his word for everything.
that is one of the most efficient methods of manipulation, to act as if they have been on the other side, makes their argument seem that much more convincing. its quite funny seeing people watch a video all about Jordan deception and simultaneously falling prey to the same kind of deception.
Just because they’ve changed, doesn’t mean they’ve changed for the better or are somehow more correct now. Sorry.
Listen to Jordan's debate with Sam Harris.
Jordan basically talks non sense throughout.
Even destiny made him seethe lol
@@siddharthkashyap4251 I like Destiny, lost his girlfriend but still not losing braincells.
I really appreciate you SID, i do see a lot of reactionary sentiments coming from even educated south asian men, i think with the rise of women's rights and lgbt rights, a lot of young men in patriarchal cultures feel threatened, i see this sentiment a lot from indian men, but its reassuring to see some pushing back against that. In fact a lot of like anti "social justice" stuff i see online comes from muslims and south asians, which i think makes sense as in an interconnected world people in these more patriarchal cultures are exposed to more challenges to their assumptions.
not everyone, a lot of us are sick of biased laws, unfair stereotyping and mental gymnastics and strawman to justify discrimination against men. We arent looking to take away womens rights.
He is 61, so I think it's safe to assume it took him 50 years to learn how to pronounce "Dostoyevsky", 5 years to read "Crime and punishment", and six years to read 200 pages of "The brothers Karamazov"
Finally, the video I was eagerly waiting for! 🔥
Ok member
@@motherisape yeah. 🤓
Only ₹29.😉
@@jangwan 😂
18:00 18:05 18:07 18:08
The guy is basically a far right fanatic. The people who follow him are either fanatics themselves or dont know about that side of him.
damn.. loved this one. Keep it going Pranav! excellent episode!
This video is on point. I would love to see you on The Line with Matt Dillahunty at some point!
I too was taken aback by Peterson's religious intonations, but soon began to ignore all of it and sieve to the parts where he did make sense.
I completely agree with your point. Instead of disliking someone for having a different opinion just taking what is necessary from them is always the wise option.
@@windscaar13 the guy is bought by daily wire now.. there's not much we can get other than what daily wire audience loves to hear.
@@pm6127 I agree that he is not like how he used to be. If that's all he has to offer then nothing wrong looking elsewhere I guess.
He saw the dollars in weighing in on things he had no academic authority to once he saw those internet view dollar signs.
Matt Dillahunty debate was a classic. I liked him there still, as an ok religious interlocutor, relatively. I think JP really took defeat well towards the end. Then as you say, he's avoided debates altogether, especially Matt Dilahunty.
What are your thoughts on transgender people participating in women's sport?
"Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool."
Voltaire
Jesus always confronted religious people of his time.
Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous. And you say, `If we had lived in the days of our forefathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets. '(Mathew 23)
14:12 I have not seen the entire video b/w Peterson and Dillahunty and dont want to but i dont think he is saying that athesits are murders. He is simpy pointing out that because an atheist is smart enough to understand that there is no natural basis for any morals, even seemingly immoral behaviour like murder would not be seen as wrong.
At the end of the day i think Jordan Peterson understands the value of myth and religion in shaping our cultures, morals and valies and his comments calling prominent atheists as christians stem from seeing much of western culture as derivatve of Judeo christian cultures, philosophy an value which is premised on existence of God. That is how i understand his views i may be wrong about it though.
Morals are simple, it can be summarised with one single sentence: don't intentionally hurt somebody. New babies cry because they are hurt by something, crying is a feeling that does not "feel" good. You don't need an imaginary entity to rule out that if I don't feel good doing something, I will not not do this to others. JP's argument is flawed, it assumed we don't cry or feel "bad".
@@eeriemyxi Morals are much, much more than that. They are the unwritten rules that enable cooperative living and provide a guide in how to get through life.
What you are describing is an inherent feeling about empathy, like the inherent feeling about fairness that all human have. Morals are how a group sharpens and directs these very base feelings concrete rules and regulations and codes of actions. You can't live life unfortunately with only a feeling that you should not hurt others, you need codes and guidelines how to use that feeling as you interact with the world.
Think of a deity existing like value enclosed in a currency note, both fictions but fictions that enable to create a set of behaviors based on our inherent feeling of empathy and understanding of value.
Thank God someone with a braincell.
@@battlerushiromiya651 Life is not an defined task, we only survive it. Some live it against the morale, some live it following the morale.
Cooperative living, that is human race surviving together, is all based on a simple "meta-rule", to not hurt somebody; we have defined several rules basing this little feeling -- religions provided these derived rules while also making an imaginary entity to cherish and be fearful of, but this is not the sole way of doing it. Your hierarchy of value can be empathy alone, not an imaginary figure being coalesced. You don't need God to generate morale.
Here I simulate my little planet: Two beings are summoned, they are social creatures, they are curious, they try going back and forth, they look everywhere, they find a source of lava (lava pool), they try to touch this glowing thing, they touch it, it burns them really bad, they "feel bad", they conclude it is bad to touch lava, but they then find a stick, they try touching the lava with the stick, it doesn't hurt them, so they now conclude touching lava barehands is bad. Similarly sexual assaults and criminal behaviors are attacked using morale with this little feeling, a feeling that is a chemical reaction in our minds, it is not developed by religions, or by reading religious scriptures. We don't need God to fear, we only need empathy to not having to fear, because that is what we can assure.
@@eeriemyxi I don't think not hurting others is what drove human civilization but other than that you yourself admit religions role in formulating these roles while simultaneously denouncing the role a higher deity playe in ensuring the rules were followed. You can't have it both ways.
Society forming is more complex than simply being guided by your feelings of empathy because we are not just driven by empathy but by greed, guilt, disgust, envy etc. Not only have many societies formed that put empathy at lower value than say disgust but hav even thrived.
Empathy is not useful when you go theough periodic epidemics and where you need to cultivate disgust for society to survive. Empathy is a very important emotion but on its own is not sufficient.
You may not need God to survive but those societies with God have survived the worse of calamities. In the future I hope that societies which don't base their values on God survive a crisis on their way of life.
Jordan's argument against Climate, as shown in this video, really made me giggle. Imagine amounting all that to a set of silly numbers. I bet he oversimplifies flood and natural disasters as an unbidden error in set of numbers/research 💀
Natural disasters have been around since time-immemorial. Man has tried to understand it and predict it and control it to protect himself from danger and harness the energies of nature to his advantage. And as long as there has been man, there has been con men trying to capitalize on natural disasters. Yogis, Babas, gurus and the witch doctors have attributed natural disasters to curses that only they can lift. Science was supposed to expose their fraud. But in the 21st century, scientists have usurped the language of science to perpetuate fraud. Scientists are human beings. And human beings can be corrupted. People can lie for money. For grants. It helps them buy big houses and assert great authority. The bigger the crisis, the greater the authority. No lasting solution is ever proposed. For if it works, they lost their cash cow. If it does not, they lose credibility.
Climate change dystopians often cite Pakistan as an example, highlighting devastating floods and a significant number of casualties. However, one important aspect that is often overlooked is the remarkable population growth of 200 million over the past 80 years
@@skumflum3768Overpopulation is a myth
@@mcboat3467 it really depends on what you’re referring to
@@mcboat3467 well did we ever have such population of humans in the past?
There are so many ideologies being floated by different speakers. We need to have our inner filters strong to separate chaff from grain.
instant sub. Awesome video!
I was told by my friend to listen to JBP in 2016, 5 minutes into his lecture, I was like, he sounds like an Indian professor who reads from a textbook and relies on generalization rather than elaborating nuances. After Trump became president, he realized Trump's followers as the most gullible idiots he can make immense money out of and he did just that. It is worth mentioning that psychology has always been geared and partial towards upper class rich white men while being exclusionary of the rest of the communities. Peterson continues to propagate that vision with regards to psychology, hence you see him dehumanizing others. I will never understand Indian stans of Peterson because he basically considers you as less human for not believing in the Christian God. And even further his belief that the Christian God is the only reason the west is developed while ignoring colonization and the exploitation along with the ill treatment of indigenous communities, black people, asians , latin americans, eastern and central europeans (under the pretext of the same God) who actually contributed to the growth in the west.
Pretty much my experience as well .
Check out his interactions with Muslims. It's quite interesting. He does open up to other ideas even though he sticks to his own for most part.
I must disagree on your statement that he ignores colonization.
I've binged his content, sometimes same podcast multiple times. He makes it very clear what his stand is on colonial times, racism, slavery and prejudice. He never justifies that.
What he disagrees is on the current World.
He is a Christian and very well so. Just bcz he is white one must not fault him. He didn't ask for the burden of privilege on the basis of race.
Instead of personal attacks on his personal beliefs, lets try to counter him on his intellectual rationale. It doesn't matter why he holds the opinion he does. It only matter if he is right and just in what he says.
True.
So many women say things contrary to so called male dominated psychology nonsense, but all opinions are mostly rejected.
Psychology as science is highly biased towards certain group of people
So many psychologists still "treat" gays and lesbians.
I
@@stk6997 if you look at what he says about iq, i think that would contradict a lot of what he claims his beliefs on racism and prejudice are. he's basically a stealth advocate for eugenics. as in, he never actually says it because that would be bad, but his faulty conclusions on the nature of humanity and society and so on lead to no other alternative.
peterson thinks iq is an accurate measure of someone's intelligence (this is highly dubious, scientifically, and a lot of psychologists spend their careers arguing about it). he believes people's iqs are some sort of innate thing (he provides poor evidence for this that is mostly misinterpreted and ignores swathes of evidence that contradict him) that different races have different iqs (some evidence for this, not enough to make a definitive statement and definitely not enough to say it's innate rather than environmental) and that people in the lowest few percentile of iq can't add to society in any productive way because no jobs exist for them (practically no evidence for this). he believes you shouldn't just give them money because they'll throw it all away (again, no evidence). he believes you can't just teach them to be better at stuff so they can get a job (no evidence for this).
so look at the world he lays out
- iq is an accurate measure of people's intelligence
- iq is innate
- some races are inherently more stupid than other races
- there aren't any jobs for stupid people
- stupid people can't be supported through social programs because they're too stupid
- stupid people can't become smarter/smart enough to get one of those jobs through training or studying or any other solution we could possibly come up with
this is stealth eugenics. he's laid out the full argument for eugenics and he just stops shy of saying the word and instead says shit like "yeah its a huge problem and we should discuss what to do about it in the marketplace of ideas". he also uses a study done in south africa shortly after apartheid ended to support his "black people are more stupid than white people" claim so the him taking colonization seriously thing is just a farce. no one who actually takes colonization seriously takes disparate scores in what was recently an apartheid nation as evidence of anything other than proof of the evils of apartheid
i used to have exact opposite views but creators like you made me think critically and made me rational. thank you and keep up the good work.
Dude this video didn't even scratch the surface. You should still read more and listen more, probably from both the sides to conclude on your opinions. This video was equally biased and was cherry picking arguments mostly
I basically took the same path as SiD concerning Peterson.
He seemed bright at first but the more i watched the more I saw tremendous errors spewed with tremendous confidence. Sad, really. His sheep just baahhhh.
@@windscaar13 JP is a charlatan, what does a psychologist have to do with diets and climate? That's right nothing. I need no more proof I should not have to disprove every single instance of someone being wrong before I know they are lying for money.
Coming out of your internet bubble is one of the most challenging thing a person can do on the internet. You must have a strong fortitude and character to achieve that.
9:33 where did you find that Jordan Peterson is a practicing christian?
Do smthg on j Sai Deepak
He is history, science is dope doesn't talk about history.
Hearing to him gives me brain damage
Frustration of left wingers 😂😂😂
@@Just9n__of course rice bags and muslim don't accept history they like to live in delusion
@@prasadshinde1092if there's a dog constantly barking in the street and the residents decide to shut it up in some way or other, that's not because of "frustration". It's because they are legitimately concerned about the peace in their street.
Dude you are so underrated
And tbh I want you to be that !!
I would like to debate with you someday about it..if you see this comment please reply