That's my take on it as well. This is why he creates nebulous talking points in order to avoid asserting an affirmative or negative stance on the topic.
It's more like Peterson doesn't entirely understand Christianity and you're watching him learn about it in real time as he's working through it and wrestling with it.
He taught a course on the Bible and Christianity for like over a decade. I think he understands. His take is that it's way more profound than wether or not God is "real" that the book is more true than that. It's true weather you think it's real or you don't. That the Bible is full of fundamentally true things even if not historically true.
@@fearfulartist1236 There's a big difference between academic study and religious study. He gets a lot of basic things wrong. A lot less now than a year ago, though.
When I was a graduate student at UC San Diego in the late '90s, I used to eat at a Thai restaurant in La Jolla that was next door to the Chopra Center. One evening a friend and I were having dinner at the restaurant, and we spent most of the dinner listening to a pompous windbag engaging in a very loud and embarrassingly moronic monologue on all sorts of esoteric subjects while a much younger and apparently submissive and impressionable man listened quietly and intently. The windbag had his back to us, so we couldn't see his face, but we heard every word of his drivel. At one point my friend and I leaned toward one another across the table to agree quietly that the fellow doing all the talking was a narcissistic moron. At about that point, the two people stood up to leave, and the windbag turned around so we could see his face. It was Deepak Chopra.
Interesting. It reminds of this time me and my girlfriend were eating in this fancy restaurant while on holiday. A few tables up from us this man was talking to his friend. On the table behind him were two middle aged ladies. They were listening to him and giving him these snobby looks behind his back. Basically judging and looking down on him for whatever he was saying. Me and my girlfriend noticed their looks and how snobby and nosy they were. And how they were better off minding their own business and enjoying their food. You remind me of those two ladies.
The snake symbol represents medicine, or some divine inspiration, was incipiently brought to the light by Carl G. Jung, and Prof. Peterson was deeply influenced him.
@@skyeangelofdeath7363How can you be sure that Jordan Peterson isn’t able to explain things that this guy didn’t understand? How would you know better than him? 😂
As a Christian I 100% agree, I think people just think he’s saying something profound, especially when he cries a little while saying it. But he just seems really pretentious.
And kind of sad. I think he really needs some good friends. And then he can tell them his bs and won't have to embarrass himself in front of everyone else.
So, you think the Universe just popped human kind out of NOTHING? I guess you believe in Big Bang too? Something came out of NOTHING????? Reeeeeally???? Sounds like word salad to me....
People have been threatened, bullied or criminally targeted in their jobs for refusing to use preferred pronouns and now it's a more global phenomenon. The one I recall off hand was an Irish teacher. And I was transgender for 14 years, I'm not remotely anti trans and didn't tolerate people treating me as the wrong gender, especially since I had been abused and denied personhood as a real person throughout childhood. I learned that I had to fight to death to prove my gender and nobody else had to prove it. So you know my reference to JBP is not emotionally or ideologically motivated, since I want people to use pronouns that align with gender identity. I'm just letting you know that he didn't falsify anything and it was not a baseless conspiracy.
@@anewagora That's so weird, because if you try find evidence of anyone being arrested for misgendering someone, the results are zero. There are some cases where people claim they were arrested for that, but then when you look at the cases it's usually something else that they were arrested for like doxxing. For example, the woman in Ireland who was arrested was actually sharing “confidential details of my personal medical and financial information” on social media. I have yet to find a case where an arrest was made for misgendering. JK Rowling's whole career at this point has been doing that online, yet she is still walking around a free woman.
I don't watch Peterson all the time but frankly most of the time I do it's not that hard to understand what he's saying. He's certainly off by more than a little quite often, but the way he approaches these topics and connects ideas is rather impressive or fascinating at the least, simply because it is interesting and understandable. Even when the dots he's trying to connect.. Don't and aren't supposed to connect.
it is definitely an interesting case study of how a benzos addiction, brain damage from a self induced coma, apple cider as your mortal enemy and a beef diet do to someone.
You are BS. Dawkins admits he doesn't know physic and he refused to talk about Peterson before years ago because he did not know much about his work. Dawkins is open to admit he doesn't know everything. You are BS just because you hate him and you said BS like this.
Can you explain Jordans religious stance? He breaks down some of the religious stories well like kane and is able, but I still don't know what he believes or what God is to him.
I’m an agnostic with a Christian heritage so I attended church and went through confirmation when younger. Although my beliefs are somewhat different than Dawkins i do appreciate that you know where he stands at what he believes when it comes to religion. On the other hand with Peterson I don’t really know, is he agnostic or Christian? IMHO he seems somewhat vague to me, perhaps because he doesn’t want to alienate any particular side?
@@joemarz2264 Most believers are not fanatics in any religion. That is beyond silly. That is the reddit, fedora tipping, and "hahaha spaghetti monster" talking point.
Interestingly enough, that’s exactly how I feel but never knew how to emphasize it. When I hear someone speak about something that clearly sounds like they don’t know what they’re talking about, I stop listening or tune them out in conversation. Jordan, Rogan, Poole, Shapiro, they all use similar tactics to overwhelm the people they connect to with the intention to dominate, instead of communicate.
He never said that he did, He was saying that taking a snake design and saying that it is similar to DNA is bull, Which it is, there is no sane person that would disagree
When I look at Richard Dawkins I don’t see a man in peace with himself but an argumentative spirit within himself it’s a spirit of pride that pierces his bones, he must find the redeemer before it’s too late for him
@@muchiribantu3226 yes… and if u think about it, you know that no one has never tried to take it away from him, and he has used it to became a famous political figure by saying the things that all conservatives say pretending to be a victim (of hate speech) but, at the same time, going all over the world spreading misinformation and bull shit. How convenient, uh…?
@@briancox9357 Your freedom ends where someone else's begins. Some kinds of speech are simply only valuable to show what a hateful miserable person the speaker is. You're free to do that of course, but so far the countries that outlawed it have lost nothing of value. In some countries it's also illegal to have swastika tattoos and flags, and guess what, it never affected any reasonable person.
@@SaHaRaSquad Nonsense. The censorship never stops at swastikas. Dawkins is referring to the lunatic Canadian laws that criminalize misgendering and pronouns as "hate speech." The slippery slope has become a slippery free-fall
@@gootmanboats3864 of course, I don’t know how to build a rocket engine but I appreciate those who do because of them I can fly around the country and there are plenty of other things I appreciate I lack understanding of, try again.
ANYBODY who can help save Europe from Islam is worth listening too . Both Jordan Peterson and Richard Dawkins are in the process of doing that , respect each other and get on with the job please.
JP is more eloquent and verbally gifted than your average joe but to suggest he says unintelligible meaningless drivel.... I am french and yet i understand 99% of what he says. He has found a way to articulate a lot of things that people have been thinking for a long time. Backs it up with data. And i find quite a lot of substance in his speech. I am not a christian and maybe he isnt the most well versed in thar regard but his bible lectures are still interesting. And it is such a complex book there isnt one way to look at it. Talking to 2 or 3 priests is enough to realize that.
Part of the problem with life is that those you think are much smarter are much dumber to others. And those who normally you will consider dumb may be the wisest to many people. How do you navigate that? To some, Jordan Petersson is an upright and highly intelligent persona. Hawkings, who I heard someone in my corner once describe as a tough guy who looks better than he thinks better, seems smart to me. What a life!
Did you know, a small 5 X 5 foot tarp will keep most of the rain off you and … You can heat 16 ounces of cold water over a can of Sterno with cross stands on top? When you are homeless this is how you get heat INSIDE of you. Practical knowledge and “food for thought” in one go.
I respect both Dawkins and Peterson. One thing I’ve noticed about Dawkins though: he seems to be that guy who slanders you when talking to someone else. Then, should he pass you on the street (or on your own podcast) he’s all smiles and pats on the back. He did it to Piers Morgan and now he’s doing it to Jordan Peterson. The former confronted him about that and Dawkins backpedaled and said he actually doesn’t have anything bad to say about him.
In many cases reading a person's books with no prior knowledge of the author would help people take on board the message(s) and take from it as they may. Hopefully in a spirit of betterment of themselves and everyone else.
Jordan Peterson is a good actor. I have seen him in some super dramatic video clips of him crying when speaking about God. Religion is good for some ppl. But to insist on everyone in the country has to accept and become a believer like them? NOPE. That will never happen.
I think that Jordan Peterson sees things on such a subatomic level that everything and anything can be further distilled into more, and more information. I'm not suggesting that's for better or for worse, but those types of thinkers can, and will, try to break down reality to its most infinitesimal level.
I think it’s hard for someone like Richard and most intellects to stomach, another intellectual speculate about religion. For the empiricist/atheist, it’s probably borderline offensive. But Jordan is putting his spiritual hat on and in order to expand on these topics it’s fundamental to be speculative because he’s analyzing the non-empirical based on faith.
Him pointing out that people that were here before us may have been more advanced than we were taught is not bs. We fancy ourselves as so brilliant nobody before us could be so brilliant. Lol there is a lot that says we are possibly not as advanced. There is evidence of resets where we get advanced and then have to start over. I think some of us have some information on that and because many of us are so limited they won't explore it at all. My teacher or mother never taught me this so it can't be true.
RD's whole ethos is that we are on our own and there is no divine source, however until the universe is explained then he will not be beleived by everyone
I have a good friend who is Canadian and has on more than one occasion described Jordan Peterson as an intellectual bully who can push the right to offend to the limits when he gets emotional. My opinion of him rose significantly after the Cathy Newman interview. But on the subject of religion I'm not sure of how he actually stands because I've never heard him say he believes in God but praises the bible and the messages.On the other hand he spoke about how humans have learned through instinct how to be social creatures because of its benefits, even letting someone win in some way to " make a friend" ( if you keep playing the same game and keep winning the opponent will stop playing the game,so to keep them playing it takes a compromise on your part ) So making compromise and feeling empathy ( instinctually) and understanding the value of the Hurd means that the argument by religious people that without god we would become savages.. which doesn't sound like there's much use for the bible...to me
Never heard a word from Peterson I didn't understand. Never heard him say anything like that literally. Dawkins seems more like a guy who wants to put others down where it puts him up/makes himself more secure. A case of where you are what you acuse others of being.
I like and respect Peterson and Dawkins. I think the critique was a bit unfair. Sure, Peterson talks over our heads but I'd have to hear the two-snakes thing in context, I've listened to Dr. Peterson a lot and I can't ever recall him pushing any sort of religious beliefs, he talks of religion in a pretty casual way.
Jordan Peterson on “””free speech””” is nonsense, too. He was contesting the addition of trans people to hate crime laws. As in, the laws that prevent people from getting away with screaming the hard R at a black guy. I don’t see Dawkins contesting the free speech of a white supremacist, though
What’s bizarre to me is I personally think Jordan Peterson’s explanation of his religious beliefs is extremely clear and also well articulated, and to me they sound extremely genuine and well defended. I don’t personally 100% agree with his beliefs, but I completely see why he has them and have no reason to believe he is making them up to gain favor with his followers or to avoid the hard questions, etc., etc. In his book Maps of Meaning his spells out his religious beliefs very clearly, although I’m sure those beliefs continue to evolve. What is bizarre to me is how many people criticize his beliefs alleging that he is trying to cater to his followers or is just too stupid to see the truth. I have clicked on several videos of people I thought were supposed to be smart, (Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, etc.), and basically every single person who criticizes his beliefs DOESN’T EVEN KNOW WHAT HE BELIEVES. Now don’t get me wrong, not every person is expected to know what every other person believes, but if you haven’t even put in the basic effort to be able to summarize what the person is saying they believe and have that track with what the person says they believe you are quite frankly not qualified to make any judgment about whether they are genuine in their beliefs or whether their beliefs have any merit. Now to be fair, sometimes a person’s beliefs are so confusing you can spend years studying them and still not understand them. If you have spent years studying them and can say those beliefs are probably intentionally nonsense to avoid criticism that is one thing. But it doesn’t hold water for Jordan Peterson’s beliefs because I personally understood what Dr. Peterson was saying after studying his beliefs for only a few hours. I seriously doubt I have some superior IQ to giants like Dawkins and Harris, so if they aren’t understanding his beliefs the most logical conclusion is that they haven’t even invested a few hours into actually studying what he believes, but they are still arrogant enough to publicly condemn those beliefs? Perhaps that is the answer. Perhaps some people default to immediately dismissing what they don’t understand and immediately default to assuming a person is acting in bad faith until proven otherwise, and when it comes to something nuanced or something that might challenge their preconceived notions they are unwilling to put in enough effort to make it possible for them to be proven otherwise even if someone puts before them the most compelling case that has ever been made with the best evidence and best logic and most factual truth ever.
Say you think you’re smarter than everyone else without saying you think you’re smarter than everyone else. “I think he uses language people can’t understand and then they believe him” (not a direct quote but you get the idea). If only the rest of us Neanderthals could be so sophisticated enough to understand the Bible and not be tricked by a broad vocabulary.
I think hes wrong on the double helix. Some entheogens can allow a deep introspection into the body down to the level of cells and stuff. No idea how its works thought
Everything after Death is just one big question mark. The Mystery of where we came from seems to have to remain a Mystery. That's just the way this Cosmic machinery works folks. 🧬
I don't think Jordan Peterson literally thinks ancient people knew about DNA and drew it in the form of two snakes. He was talking about symbols that are recurrent throughout history including the eye of Horus
The relationship between Dawkins and Peterson represents a much larger conflict humans are currently undergoing. The people who DON'T NEED meaning, therefore, residing in perceived objective truths at its face value versus people who NEED meaning and reside to exploring past the objective truths for the "adhesive" element between the lines. Which, for the most part, remain subjective theories. It's sad because one side is mostly incapable of seeing him/herself in the other persons shoes and really trying to understand what they have to offer. While the other side has no problem for the most part to put themselves in the other shoes, they then choose to step out of them because it simply isn't enough for them.... I don't know. There's a part of me that believes both can really benefit from each other and make this and hopefully other worlds truly beautiful.
I don't like Richard Dawkins conflation of "defending free speech" with JP's attacks on trans people by misgendering them. Misgendering people is wrong, and intentionally doing it repeatedly is harassment.
They both swim in the darkness of their limits. And their limits are so deep! Hebrew 3:4. Simple logic that needs no more words but some dark minds would be wiser than they are and try to change simple laws of logic with dark arguments.
Jordan Peterson is making the case for religion from a Jungian perspective. The idea is that religions not only have utility, but there is a religious tendency embedded in the human psyche and is integral to our existence. The Christian myths may or may not be literally true, but that is irrelevant when considering the symbolic importance and the actual message that is being communicated.
Damnit. I (kinda) respect Peterson for insisting on demanding the right to disrespect people, but in no way do I "respect his courage" for being an asshole and actually doing it. So I find it distressing that Dawkins does.
Jordan Peterson epitomises the phrase "a little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing". The only talent Peterson has is to take something of which he has very little knowledge and expound upon it as if he was an authority. Gaslying. As a psychologist, I wouldn't show him my back, let alone my mind.
My take is that Peterson is actually an atheist who is trying not to alienate his Christian audience.
I think he secretly is.
Alex even did a video on this and showed JP saying that god is a fictional character and that the bible is basically metaphor.
That's my take on it as well. This is why he creates nebulous talking points in order to avoid asserting an affirmative or negative stance on the topic.
Sure, as he brings THOUSANDS of individuals, including his wife, back to the Church. Brilliant claim.
@@Piercetheveilnow You really think he is s Christian, dude hasn't heard him speak well 😂😂
It's more like Peterson doesn't entirely understand Christianity and you're watching him learn about it in real time as he's working through it and wrestling with it.
In my opinion we all get this journey eventually.
@@dooflydetailguuy4349
And it's a journey that never really ends, to be honest.
@@manguy01 I heard that's what eternity is
He taught a course on the Bible and Christianity for like over a decade. I think he understands. His take is that it's way more profound than wether or not God is "real" that the book is more true than that. It's true weather you think it's real or you don't. That the Bible is full of fundamentally true things even if not historically true.
@@fearfulartist1236
There's a big difference between academic study and religious study. He gets a lot of basic things wrong. A lot less now than a year ago, though.
When I was a graduate student at UC San Diego in the late '90s, I used to eat at a Thai restaurant in La Jolla that was next door to the Chopra Center. One evening a friend and I were having dinner at the restaurant, and we spent most of the dinner listening to a pompous windbag engaging in a very loud and embarrassingly moronic monologue on all sorts of esoteric subjects while a much younger and apparently submissive and impressionable man listened quietly and intently. The windbag had his back to us, so we couldn't see his face, but we heard every word of his drivel. At one point my friend and I leaned toward one another across the table to agree quietly that the fellow doing all the talking was a narcissistic moron. At about that point, the two people stood up to leave, and the windbag turned around so we could see his face. It was Deepak Chopra.
Critical thought is going extinct. You certainly got some else’s doze plus your own.
Imagine how big his ego is, if u disagreed with him he would probably go insane
@@Atclav Um, what?
Interesting. It reminds of this time me and my girlfriend were eating in this fancy restaurant while on holiday. A few tables up from us this man was talking to his friend. On the table behind him were two middle aged ladies. They were listening to him and giving him these snobby looks behind his back. Basically judging and looking down on him for whatever he was saying.
Me and my girlfriend noticed their looks and how snobby and nosy they were. And how they were better off minding their own business and enjoying their food.
You remind me of those two ladies.
@@waynedonoghue4071🔥
Turns out ancient peoples were really into snake porn.
Respect
Yup
Aaaand this week on "The World's Craziest Accidental Scientific Discoveries"... ;)
The snake symbol represents medicine, or some divine inspiration, was incipiently brought to the light by Carl G. Jung, and Prof. Peterson was deeply influenced him.
@@sylviaowega3839 in scandinavian and baltic tradition the snake represents medicine and fertility.
I actually think Jordan Peterson has a profound ability to explain things that I didn’t previously understand.
I think so aswell. Except for religion.
Could that be just one more thing you don't understand? @@PoliticallyIncorrectBronto
No, he doesn't.
@@skyeangelofdeath7363How can you be sure that Jordan Peterson isn’t able to explain things that this guy didn’t understand? How would you know better than him? 😂
Yes. That doesn't make him right about everything though
As a Christian I 100% agree, I think people just think he’s saying something profound, especially when he cries a little while saying it. But he just seems really pretentious.
And kind of sad.
I think he really needs some good friends.
And then he can tell them his bs and won't have to embarrass himself in front of everyone else.
I couldn’t agree more with Dr Dawkins! 👍
Same here
So, you think the Universe just popped human kind out of NOTHING? I guess you believe in Big Bang too? Something came out of NOTHING????? Reeeeeally???? Sounds like word salad to me....
@@supersagamaster simping
He must be profound because you didn't understand what he said? Also, British accent = smart? /s
His “standing up for Canadian free speech” is a lie too. JP was disingenuous about the whole misgendered language thing.
100%. Nothing has changed. JP himself is proof of that. He just needs to be angry about something to get people to give him more money.
What did you expected from Dick?
I find it sad that Dawkins agrees with him on that, it's twisting the truth after all
People have been threatened, bullied or criminally targeted in their jobs for refusing to use preferred pronouns and now it's a more global phenomenon. The one I recall off hand was an Irish teacher. And I was transgender for 14 years, I'm not remotely anti trans and didn't tolerate people treating me as the wrong gender, especially since I had been abused and denied personhood as a real person throughout childhood. I learned that I had to fight to death to prove my gender and nobody else had to prove it. So you know my reference to JBP is not emotionally or ideologically motivated, since I want people to use pronouns that align with gender identity. I'm just letting you know that he didn't falsify anything and it was not a baseless conspiracy.
@@anewagora That's so weird, because if you try find evidence of anyone being arrested for misgendering someone, the results are zero. There are some cases where people claim they were arrested for that, but then when you look at the cases it's usually something else that they were arrested for like doxxing. For example, the woman in Ireland who was arrested was actually sharing “confidential details of my personal medical and financial information” on social media.
I have yet to find a case where an arrest was made for misgendering. JK Rowling's whole career at this point has been doing that online, yet she is still walking around a free woman.
I want Dawkins voice saying “it’s sheer bullshit” as my ringtone
If you want everyone to think your Fedora tipping douchebag go for it
I don't watch Peterson all the time but frankly most of the time I do it's not that hard to understand what he's saying. He's certainly off by more than a little quite often, but the way he approaches these topics and connects ideas is rather impressive or fascinating at the least, simply because it is interesting and understandable. Even when the dots he's trying to connect.. Don't and aren't supposed to connect.
JP is willing to connect dots in ways most serious academics would never dare to. His off the cuff verbal fluency def helps.
it is definitely an interesting case study of how a benzos addiction, brain damage from a self induced coma, apple cider as your mortal enemy and a beef diet do to someone.
I'm Catholic, because duh, Christ is God. But Dawko, nail on the head on Peterson. Prayin' for ya both Doc, we gon' make it.
I believe it was more, Jordan talking at Richard for an hour rather than a conversation.
Anything what Dawkins doesn't understand is sheer bullsheet.
You are BS. Dawkins admits he doesn't know physic and he refused to talk about Peterson before years ago because he did not know much about his work. Dawkins is open to admit he doesn't know everything. You are BS just because you hate him and you said BS like this.
@@franklink472 Absolutely don't hate Dawkins.. he is one of us. You missed the point in your lovely disposition.
Can you explain Jordans religious stance? He breaks down some of the religious stories well like kane and is able, but I still don't know what he believes or what God is to him.
I’m an agnostic with a Christian heritage so I attended church and went through confirmation when younger. Although my beliefs are somewhat different than Dawkins i do appreciate that you know where he stands at what he believes when it comes to religion. On the other hand with Peterson I don’t really know, is he agnostic or Christian? IMHO he seems somewhat vague to me, perhaps because he doesn’t want to alienate any particular side?
Yeah, and JP wasn't adamant on that point. He was kind of musing and pondering. He isn't dying on that hill, it's just an interesting idea
jordan peterson is a non believer who acts like believer to not lose his followers who pay him money.
So? Being a non-believer is definitely a bonus. Most believers are fanatics.
@@joemarz2264 Most believers are not fanatics in any religion. That is beyond silly. That is the reddit, fedora tipping, and "hahaha spaghetti monster" talking point.
Old british atheists are unchill
By definition anyone who is an atheist is chill and smart enough to know that religion is the biggest con ever to have been thought up.
@@teeanahera8949 I'm an atheist. But he's still unchill
@@jwillied1326 chill dude, if you can still wear a shirt by yourself - let alone speak - at his age, talk again.
@@BillyViBritannia I will be fine, it's the old british atheists i'm worried about!
Interestingly enough, that’s exactly how I feel but never knew how to emphasize it. When I hear someone speak about something that clearly sounds like they don’t know what they’re talking about, I stop listening or tune them out in conversation. Jordan, Rogan, Poole, Shapiro, they all use similar tactics to overwhelm the people they connect to with the intention to dominate, instead of communicate.
Because Richard Dawkins knows all about ancient tribes people.
He never said that he did, He was saying that taking a snake design and saying that it is similar to DNA is bull, Which it is, there is no sane person that would disagree
When I look at Richard Dawkins I don’t see a man in peace with himself but an argumentative spirit within himself it’s a spirit of pride that pierces his bones, he must find the redeemer before it’s too late for him
I doubt Rassilon would be able to help
I just replaced the implied name, JP, with the implicator's name, RD, with all that was being said here, and discovered that both made equal sense. 😄
Peterson is not fighting for “free speech”… he is fighting for “free hate speech”… that’s all another story!
Which, when you think about it, is also free speech.
@@muchiribantu3226 yes… and if u think about it, you know that no one has never tried to take it away from him, and he has used it to became a famous political figure by saying the things that all conservatives say pretending to be a victim (of hate speech) but, at the same time, going all over the world spreading misinformation and bull shit. How convenient, uh…?
Free speech includes hate speech. Hate speech is defined by law, culture and politics. It's free speech or nothing.
@@briancox9357 Your freedom ends where someone else's begins. Some kinds of speech are simply only valuable to show what a hateful miserable person the speaker is. You're free to do that of course, but so far the countries that outlawed it have lost nothing of value.
In some countries it's also illegal to have swastika tattoos and flags, and guess what, it never affected any reasonable person.
@@SaHaRaSquad Nonsense. The censorship never stops at swastikas. Dawkins is referring to the lunatic Canadian laws that criminalize misgendering and pronouns as "hate speech." The slippery slope has become a slippery free-fall
There's few things i find funnier than hearing a well spoken English accent saying "that is sheer bullshit".
DAWK THE DUMBY
"I know everything except how to button my own shirt." - Dawkins
Good catch! 😅
So Dawkins basically stated he himself does not appreciate things he can’t understand, and this is the guy intellectuals look up to, smh.
Do you appreciate things for which you lack understanding?
@@gootmanboats3864 of course, I don’t know how to build a rocket engine but I appreciate those who do because of them I can fly around the country and there are plenty of other things I appreciate I lack understanding of, try again.
Intellectuals DO NOT look up to Peterson. Don't delude yourself.
@@aliquida7132 because you’re that authority on that 🤣🤣🤣
ANYBODY who can help save Europe from Islam is worth listening too . Both Jordan Peterson and Richard Dawkins are in the process of doing that , respect each other and get on with the job please.
If you can't dazzle with brilliance, baffle with bullshit, that petersons motto.
JP is more eloquent and verbally gifted than your average joe but to suggest he says unintelligible meaningless drivel....
I am french and yet i understand 99% of what he says.
He has found a way to articulate a lot of things that people have been thinking for a long time. Backs it up with data.
And i find quite a lot of substance in his speech.
I am not a christian and maybe he isnt the most well versed in thar regard but his bible lectures are still interesting. And it is such a complex book there isnt one way to look at it.
Talking to 2 or 3 priests is enough to realize that.
Not all heroes wear capes.
Thank you Richard for all you do.
Part of the problem with life is that those you think are much smarter are much dumber to others. And those who normally you will consider dumb may be the wisest to many people. How do you navigate that?
To some, Jordan Petersson is an upright and highly intelligent persona. Hawkings, who I heard someone in my corner once describe as a tough guy who looks better than he thinks better, seems smart to me. What a life!
Did you know, a small 5 X 5 foot tarp will keep most of the rain off you and …
You can heat 16 ounces of cold water over a can of Sterno with cross stands on top?
When you are homeless this is how you get heat INSIDE of you. Practical knowledge and “food for thought” in one go.
That is a bold statement for someone that entertains the simulation theory Mr. Dawkins.
JP has the ability to make complex ideas even more complex than they really are.
I respect both Dawkins and Peterson. One thing I’ve noticed about Dawkins though: he seems to be that guy who slanders you when talking to someone else. Then, should he pass you on the street (or on your own podcast) he’s all smiles and pats on the back. He did it to Piers Morgan and now he’s doing it to Jordan Peterson. The former confronted him about that and Dawkins backpedaled and said he actually doesn’t have anything bad to say about him.
Just adore Dawkins for not mincing words and avoiding naming people
And there are people who consider Dawkins a writer of airport literature with Harari and so on.
In many cases reading a person's books with no prior knowledge of the author would help people take on board the message(s) and take from it as they may. Hopefully in a spirit of betterment of themselves and everyone else.
Jordan Peterson is a good actor. I have seen him in some super dramatic video clips of him crying when speaking about God.
Religion is good for some ppl. But to insist on everyone in the country has to accept and become a believer like them? NOPE. That will never happen.
Dawkins would certainly believe that machines have makers, and everything else has a maker, but this enormous universe have no maker ? Stupid.
Dawkins is calling Peterson out when he can’t even button his shirt properly lol
Maybe we all have it wrong.
Peterson's "epiphany" over the coiled snakes made me do a spit take. What a vivid imagination he's got! 😮😅
I think that Jordan Peterson sees things on such a subatomic level that everything and anything can be further distilled into more, and more information. I'm not suggesting that's for better or for worse, but those types of thinkers can, and will, try to break down reality to its most infinitesimal level.
Lol this is why i have such tremendous respect for Richard Dawkins 👍👍
Same
I think it’s hard for someone like Richard and most intellects to stomach, another intellectual speculate about religion. For the empiricist/atheist, it’s probably borderline offensive. But Jordan is putting his spiritual hat on and in order to expand on these topics it’s fundamental to be speculative because he’s analyzing the non-empirical based on faith.
The “science” community: We don’t know anything, really, except that there is 1000% no God. However…… 13.8 billion years ago-
Him pointing out that people that were here before us may have been more advanced than we were taught is not bs. We fancy ourselves as so brilliant nobody before us could be so brilliant. Lol there is a lot that says we are possibly not as advanced. There is evidence of resets where we get advanced and then have to start over. I think some of us have some information on that and because many of us are so limited they won't explore it at all. My teacher or mother never taught me this so it can't be true.
"It must be terribly profound because I can't understand it." is fucking funny
“And I told him so” is wild 😭😭
RD's whole ethos is that we are on our own and there is no divine source, however until the universe is explained then he will not be beleived by everyone
I like when he said sheer bullshit love it when people call people out 😂😂😂
Thank goodness we have Richard Dawkins
"Reddit-tier" is pretty sophisticated language for a twelve-year-old.
As a catholic, I totally understand Jordan petersons interpretations. Totally.
I have a good friend who is Canadian and has on more than one occasion described Jordan Peterson as an intellectual bully who can push the right to offend to the limits when he gets emotional.
My opinion of him rose significantly after the Cathy Newman interview.
But on the subject of religion I'm not sure of how he actually stands because I've never heard him say he believes in God but praises the bible and the messages.On the other hand he spoke about how humans have learned through instinct how to be social creatures because of its benefits, even letting someone win in some way to " make a friend" ( if you keep playing the same game and keep winning the opponent will stop playing the game,so to keep them playing it takes a compromise on your part )
So making compromise and feeling empathy ( instinctually) and understanding the value of the Hurd means that the argument by religious people that without god we would become savages.. which doesn't sound like there's much use for the bible...to me
Never heard a word from Peterson I didn't understand. Never heard him say anything like that literally. Dawkins seems more like a guy who wants to put others down where it puts him up/makes himself more secure. A case of where you are what you acuse others of being.
It's funny, because I have no problem understanding what Peterson is saying even though English is not my native language.
Shame he started with the stupid debunked thing about Bill C16, but correct on the religious angle as usual
It’s very clear that most people in this section just haven’t read or listened Peterson and are also not very widely read people.
I like and respect Peterson and Dawkins. I think the critique was a bit unfair. Sure, Peterson talks over our heads but I'd have to hear the two-snakes thing in context, I've listened to Dr. Peterson a lot and I can't ever recall him pushing any sort of religious beliefs, he talks of religion in a pretty casual way.
Shouldn't Peterson have been arrested like twenty times because of the law he was protesting?
I’d prefer it if you didn’t swear. It’s unkind to the ear.
I second this
Not long now for you Dawkins, Every knee will bow!
Jordan Peterson on “””free speech””” is nonsense, too. He was contesting the addition of trans people to hate crime laws. As in, the laws that prevent people from getting away with screaming the hard R at a black guy. I don’t see Dawkins contesting the free speech of a white supremacist, though
What’s bizarre to me is I personally think Jordan Peterson’s explanation of his religious beliefs is extremely clear and also well articulated, and to me they sound extremely genuine and well defended. I don’t personally 100% agree with his beliefs, but I completely see why he has them and have no reason to believe he is making them up to gain favor with his followers or to avoid the hard questions, etc., etc. In his book Maps of Meaning his spells out his religious beliefs very clearly, although I’m sure those beliefs continue to evolve.
What is bizarre to me is how many people criticize his beliefs alleging that he is trying to cater to his followers or is just too stupid to see the truth. I have clicked on several videos of people I thought were supposed to be smart, (Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, etc.), and basically every single person who criticizes his beliefs DOESN’T EVEN KNOW WHAT HE BELIEVES. Now don’t get me wrong, not every person is expected to know what every other person believes, but if you haven’t even put in the basic effort to be able to summarize what the person is saying they believe and have that track with what the person says they believe you are quite frankly not qualified to make any judgment about whether they are genuine in their beliefs or whether their beliefs have any merit. Now to be fair, sometimes a person’s beliefs are so confusing you can spend years studying them and still not understand them. If you have spent years studying them and can say those beliefs are probably intentionally nonsense to avoid criticism that is one thing. But it doesn’t hold water for Jordan Peterson’s beliefs because I personally understood what Dr. Peterson was saying after studying his beliefs for only a few hours. I seriously doubt I have some superior IQ to giants like Dawkins and Harris, so if they aren’t understanding his beliefs the most logical conclusion is that they haven’t even invested a few hours into actually studying what he believes, but they are still arrogant enough to publicly condemn those beliefs?
Perhaps that is the answer. Perhaps some people default to immediately dismissing what they don’t understand and immediately default to assuming a person is acting in bad faith until proven otherwise, and when it comes to something nuanced or something that might challenge their preconceived notions they are unwilling to put in enough effort to make it possible for them to be proven otherwise even if someone puts before them the most compelling case that has ever been made with the best evidence and best logic and most factual truth ever.
I hugely respect the two of you, and it is such a pleasure to hear that you agree that Jordan Peterson is a total sham.
Say you think you’re smarter than everyone else without saying you think you’re smarter than everyone else.
“I think he uses language people can’t understand and then they believe him” (not a direct quote but you get the idea).
If only the rest of us Neanderthals could be so sophisticated enough to understand the Bible and not be tricked by a broad vocabulary.
JP is an egregious sophist.
Jordan doesn’t come at it from a different angle. You just haven’t taken the time to read about it without reading like you’re reading for a test.
Dawkins is a light shining and a pillar in the road of my world view. Thank you.
We don’t have “Free Speech” in Canada, we have Freedom of Expression. It is not the same. Do some research Richard.
THAT'S THE FIRST TIME DAWKINS EVER SAID SOMETHING I AGREE WITH !!!
oh yes lets praise JP for him complaining about a law where no one has ever been arrested from? good job Dawkins.
I think hes wrong on the double helix. Some entheogens can allow a deep introspection into the body down to the level of cells and stuff. No idea how its works thought
Everything after Death is just one big question mark.
The Mystery of where we came from seems to have to remain a Mystery. That's just the way this Cosmic machinery works folks. 🧬
He opens doors that doo not exist… this is how I explain him.
I don't think Jordan Peterson literally thinks ancient people knew about DNA and drew it in the form of two snakes.
He was talking about symbols that are recurrent throughout history including the eye of Horus
Richard Dawkins doesn't sugar coat it!❤❤❤
The relationship between Dawkins and Peterson represents a much larger conflict humans are currently undergoing. The people who DON'T NEED meaning, therefore, residing in perceived objective truths at its face value versus people who NEED meaning and reside to exploring past the objective truths for the "adhesive" element between the lines. Which, for the most part, remain subjective theories.
It's sad because one side is mostly incapable of seeing him/herself in the other persons shoes and really trying to understand what they have to offer. While the other side has no problem for the most part to put themselves in the other shoes, they then choose to step out of them because it simply isn't enough for them....
I don't know. There's a part of me that believes both can really benefit from each other and make this and hopefully other worlds truly beautiful.
I don't like Richard Dawkins conflation of "defending free speech" with JP's attacks on trans people by misgendering them.
Misgendering people is wrong, and intentionally doing it repeatedly is harassment.
😂😂😂😂 oh my goodness, is this real?
he doesn't slams JP, he just insults JP...
Vox Day wrote a great book on Jordan Peterson.
Petersen should be receiving medical treatment, not dispensing it. Good to see a proper scientist call out his snake oil take on the world.
Surprising that Dawkins can sniff out Peterson’s lies when it comes to religion, but fails to sniff out Peterson’s lies about Bill C-16
Finally someone who says it! Not surprised it was Dawkins
The 2 snakes could represent Kundalini ? Because the image is mythical it’s open to interpretation but DNA is a long bow.
Ha! Fair criticism from Dawkins, I love both those guys.
Dawkins takes no bullshit
Has modern philosophy become a safe space for overthinking?
They both swim in the darkness of their limits. And their limits are so deep! Hebrew 3:4. Simple logic that needs no more words but some dark minds would be wiser than they are and try to change simple laws of logic with dark arguments.
Peterson's power level is still mightier than these two, even if they were to do fusion.
I’ve never heard JP compare snakes to DNA or any scientific insight. All his spiritual stuff stays in the spiritual realm, as far as I’ve seen.
Jordan Peterson is making the case for religion from a Jungian perspective. The idea is that religions not only have utility, but there is a religious tendency embedded in the human psyche and is integral to our existence. The Christian myths may or may not be literally true, but that is irrelevant when considering the symbolic importance and the actual message that is being communicated.
I think Peterson is more cognizant of the relevance of consciousness than the realm of material significance.
His obsession with “wokeness” often makes Dawkins as much a wing nut as Peterson.
Really? lol
Dawkins thinking others are talking BS is due to his own standard of profound BS.
Isn't that a Desmond Morris painting behind RD?
Of course it is. It's the cover of The Selfish Gene. Just showing how ignorant I am again. Oh dear.
Damnit. I (kinda) respect Peterson for insisting on demanding the right to disrespect people, but in no way do I "respect his courage" for being an asshole and actually doing it. So I find it distressing that Dawkins does.
Missed a button.
Jordan Peterson epitomises the phrase "a little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing". The only talent Peterson has is to take something of which he has very little knowledge and expound upon it as if he was an authority. Gaslying.
As a psychologist, I wouldn't show him my back, let alone my mind.