Jordan Peterson vs. Sam Harris on God

[ADigitalArtist]

I dont know. The bit I do know, maybe (though not rabid as far as I know), or he could just be stupid. Like his eagerness to take on the Christian martyrdom and repression for his beliefs when he thought he would be punished heavily for braking an anti-discrimination law, but regarding such laws he's one of the many little boys who cried wolf.

I'm trying to think of anything JP could be considered 'rabidly.' He likes to couch himself in cool civility with a lot of vague statements that can be easily backpedaled out of. He doesn't make much a statement about anything except, well, vaguely.

He has said that, if asked nicely, he will use preferred pronouns, though I've never seen him actually do it. But he refuses to use non-binary gender neutral pronouns. No idea where he stands on trans issues by vote (other than against one particular bill, obviously.)

 

[Mock Turtle]

There's another peterson point there, that surely must eat away at him since is a thinker. How can he argue so vehemently for sink or swim capitalism against ubi, if he knows that we perhaps cannot all compete in an economy that's tightening down on mental horsepower. I think the truth is that he ultimately can't. Or at least you can't do it and maintain that the human experience is permeated by some kind of compassionate spiritual presence

No doubt an issue that will come to the fore soon enough, given the few countries trying such. And whatever we might think about the 10%, and any problems they might cause, I think we all know that it is usually the more intelligent that produce most of our problems - when they are pulling in different directions or just doing much for their own personal advantage or gain.

 

[Shad]

, though I've never seen him actually do it.

He has done it in various interviews and discussions within he or she binary. He does not use the neutral ones as those are just made up words.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

There's another debate featuring Peterson and Matt Dillahunty that features some of the same tomfoolery. There was one part in that debate I'll never forget - Matt Dillahunty is expressing and explaining something about how one cannot simply assume that things people label "spiritual" or "mystical" experiences have supernatural foundations, and Jordan Peterson comes back with (basically cuts Matt Dillahunty off) "Stops people from smoking." Then goes on to try and express the virtues of these "spiritual" experiences, without, in any way, tying them to anything "supernatural."

I had seen some other talks and lectures given by Peterson, and I thought him pretty intelligent and some of his conclusion on the psychology of certain human behaviors I thought were interesting, but I just kept seeing more and more clouded, unrealistic thinking in some of his stuff the more I watched, and the debate I mentioned took the cake. Didn't feel the need to listen to a single word more from the man.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

He has done it in various interviews and discussions within he or she binary. He does not use the neutral ones as those are just made up words.

If you have examples I'd love to see them. I've read his work and watched some of his interviews but by no means all.

Neverminding that all words are made up and that our collection of new words keeps significantly growing every year, nonbinary them/they single genderless pronouns are hundreds of years old lol. The vast majority of nonbinary I've met are perfectly fine with they/them.

 

[amatuerscholar]

Both individuals are low hanging fruit.

 

[Shad]

If you have examples I'd love to see them. I've read his work and watched some of his interviews but by no means all.

20:00 or so.

Neverminding that all words are made up and that our collection of new words keeps significantly growing every year, nonbinary them/they single genderless pronouns are hundreds of years old lol. The vast majority of nonbinary I've met are perfectly fine with they/them.

Made up words have no definitions. He and she mean something. Xir, and zim the invader I mean xyr mean nothing. Might as well make baby noises.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

oh he is articulate.

Sam Harris is more than just articulate. If you listen to his insights on mindfulness and the mechanics of negative emotions, and actually try to practice his methods, you will see for yourself that he is spot on. I'd wager that if everyone actually worked hard at practicing the mindfulness techniques he discusses, far fewer people would be on anxiety/depression medication.

 

[firedragon]

Sam Harris is more than just articulate. If you listen to his insights on mindfulness and the mechanics of negative emotions, and actually try to practice his methods, you will see for yourself that he is spot on. I'd wager that if everyone actually worked hard at practicing the mindfulness techniques he discusses, far fewer people would be on anxiety/depression medication.

My scholarship on that matter is very poor. So i concede.

 

[Windwalker]

I watched this debate today, and it confirmed my suspicions that Jordan Peterson is a fraud. He's trying to invent a new concept of "god" that has no real meaning yet somehow try to sit on the fence about the claims of Christianity. His intellectual dishonesty is astounding, and is revealed fully about midway through when Sam asks him if he believes Jesus was physically resurrected. Peterson responds to this question stating that it would take him 40 hours to answer that question. What a laughable response to such a simple question. He knows he can't give a straight answer because he's trying to play both sides, and knows he'll alienate half his audience if he takes a side, and thus lose half his money. He uses a lot of words, but ultimately says nothing meaningful and Sam Harris reveals this clearly when pressing him on these issues.

I had a completely different takeaway from this. In fact, I was astounded to hear just how much of what I have been saying these past few years on this topic, that Peterson has insights into! It was amazing. And I never listen to him, as the whole association with the neo-right winger thing. But when it comes to this topic, his answers were something I definitely got, and could clearly see how those answers were a bit of stretch further beyond what Harris can currently penetrate into that space.

This is not to say that everything Peterson stands for and believes is true, but what he is talking about in here, is spot on from a very sophisticated understanding. I've heard Harris many times before, and that limitation of his really comes out hear as he struggles to comprehend what is being conveyed. I could see how he just can't get there yet. I get that.