Get all sides of every story and be better informed at ground.news/AlexOC - subscribe for 40% off unlimited access. Follow my new substack: www.alexoconnor.com
You are wrong about the fact that Peterson has no problem giving a short answer to the definition of woman. He clearly stated that this is an incredibly complicated question I think (in a Convo with Matt Walsh)
you are a gay little youtube shill or you would talk to people with opinions that matter. go debate nick fuentes, or anyone who is serious about the JQ. no, instead you talk to wastes of air like destiny. I shit on people like you. fake ass nggas.
What does ground news do about truth? If Trump gets 50% of people to believe the moon is made of cheese, would ground news start to say that NASA papers have a left wing bias?
He looks like a tiny little person. I was only listening to this. Not watching. But i looked at the comments and had to look when i saw this and omg it's hilarious😂😂
@@sathrielsatanson Bro, try sitting with perfect posture in a chair like that without looking like an anxious autist. They're actual videographical sabotage, you either lean forward and perch on the outer rim like a pigeon, or you melt into the oversized seat of the chair like a slovenly gnome.
Destiny has nothing more really to say. He thinks because he has money and time that makes him a critical thinker. I dont understand how anybody can be convinced by the intellectual jerking off of being a rational-scientific debate bro.
@@curiositycloset2359 Oh he said that reading a few Wikipedia articles makes someone educated? He said that? That's something he actually said and it isn't something you just made up? Why don't you engage with the meat of the argument? Joe platforms and praises people who likely have actual brain damage. Joe doesn't seem to like people who think carefully about anything. Why don't you address that?
Lol man children. Girl just admit you're bitter 😂 Destiny is genuinely disabled mentally, and that's your rock? Bub.... He doesn't think, he "feels" shit. He doesn't have an ounce of intelligence, that actually means anything. I genuinely tried to give this guy a fair shake. I couldn't stand 5 minutes of his incessant ranting, without facts. Even the way he talks, he can't help but let his leftist, feable mind, guide him to his opinion. You're every reason why true democracy, is a cancer. Also, since you're so superior, how about you indulge all of us in your educational experience. Would love to see a university link to your master's degree. How about a successful business? Lobbying group that is still active? Anything? Don't throw stones darlin. Your walls are crumbling. @@neworderadherent
The discussion about the importance of voting only really framed it in a large-scale way, like voting for presidencies. But folks need to remember that local elections are often of incredible impact to your day-to-day and sometimes only a few hundred people are voting on the issue. Your vote has a much larger proportional impact on local elections, which are arguably of larger consequence.
Your vote has less sway over the results of a national election, but those results are of greater consequence. Local elections are less consequential, but in some cases, you and your friends could get together and flip the election.
@@sammyismuff It depends on what you mean by local elections. Governor and city council and mayoral elections can have a huge impact on things like HOUSING and transportation. You can vote for certain judges which might be the difference between a bunch of rec drug users spending a lot of time in jails (costing taxpayers a ton of money in the process) vs spending that time with their spouse and kids. You might be able to vote for the local sheriff which could be the difference between a lot of poor people getting their stuff stolen during a traffic stop and being able to pay their monthly rent (some of them become homeless as a consequence). And there are even less prioritized institutions which have local elections that can be very important like ones related to schooling, which is important to everyone whether the youth is indoctrinated or taught proper critical thinking skills and self improvement skills etc. It's not the president or even senators or congressmen who are responsible for how many homeless people there are, or how many people OD, or how many food deserts there are, how bad the minimum wage laws or work safety laws might be, or how often the power goes out when the weather is bad. They can pass things to put a bandage on the problem but a lot of problems come from these more local institutions not prioritizing the majority of their people. State's rights can be good and it can be bad, people have to vote to make it good.
“Everything you do in life will be insignificant, but it’s important that you do it” -Gandhi The entire conversation around voting had me thinking of this. Destiny preaching the Gandhi message
Yes, it's important for you to waste your time/energy spinning your wheels rather than actually getting anywhere - did the British tell Gandhi to say that? xD
This conversation was SUCH a treat. I dont think I've laughed on a philosophy podcast as much as today. I like when you nad steven talk. Feels like two differently backgrounded friends just exploring
The chair isn't little, if you look at the seat levels from the ground, they are the same height, only the chair backs are different heights. Destiny is 5'8 and Alex is... tall, I don't know how much exactly but probably around 6'2.
lmaoo that is a hilarious response. When you are married to women you end up finding the most intimate things about them that you might not as parent or siblings or friends.
Oh yeah I forgot that. Ironically despite the chatter around the boilerplate answer he might give, Destiny uploaded a video where he discusses what this is actually a better answer than the shit he's talking about in this conversation. Perhaps he had forgotten. Lol
@@noorzanayasmin7806it's from the what is a woman documentary with matt Walsh. If you do Jordan peterson what is a woman. It should be the top result.
My favorite response that I heard to what would convince you that God is real came from Matt Dillahunty when he said “I don’t know, but if God is real, he would know and if it was important for me to know him, he’d know how to convince me he’s real”
that doesn't address the problem of the question though no? Wasn't the purpose of that thought experiment to check how biased your thinking is on the subject, if you couldn't possibly think of a way god could change your mind, then something is clearly wrong. The question wasn't whether or not god could change your mind, because that's obvious, if god existed, your mind could just be changed through will alone if god wanted it to be.
@@ragegaze3482 Yeah that's true, it just works for me on a personal level when dealing with friends and family. I think the Boghossian method they discussed is a pretty good way to weed out bias and I could think of arguments that could move me somewhat to the other side, but I could always argue myself back again due to having arrived at my personal bias through years of argumentation.
@@ragegaze3482 That may have been the purpose of the thought experiment but if it was it totally fails. If someone ask you what would convince you that 2 plus 2 equals 3 and you could not possibly think of something then that is not evidence of bias its just evidence that you are intellectually incapable of coming up with a way to prove something so absurd. The actual purpose of the thought experiment is an attempt to make you give an argument for the existence of god so the apologist does not have to.
ACTUALLY, bononilly supports the genocide of Terran's and promotes military tactics such as 'retard baiting'. I heard so on tiktoks so he is wrong in this video, spamming marines takes real skill.
2:13:40 as a physics undergraduate, I honestly dismiss this 'objects don't actually touch' point by asking 'what do you mean by touch', ironically enough.
yeah its a terrible analogy by alex, we have reductive models to provide insights into complex phenomena. A quantum physicist would be able to explain why approximating a moving cow as a sphere is helpful while also being able to explain what makes the model wrong.
@@tcritt Alcohol is a disinhibitor, depending on the amount it can make you potentially numb like certain drugs, but it's main characteristics is that you don't care about consequences of your actions ...
but it's pretty clear the question that would be asked by 99.99% would be regarding the edge of the object having exactly 0 distance to the other objects edge, however deep we can define edge and object?
Generally an uninformed or misinformed streamer, depending on what BS he’s rationalizing for, that day… He seems a bit more polite and rational than usual here, talking with Alex though. Usually he’s just confidently spouting his opinions as fact, using some Wikipedia article it seems like he skimmed over that day to “prepare” for the debate.. I’ve usually only seen him debate conservatives he has a serious beef with though, where it seems like his goal is just to contradict everything the other person says regardless of what’s true or not. I haven’t watch a ton of his stiff though.
@@aalvarez2914give an example where his supposed reliance on Wikipedia has actually cost him in a conversation, or an example where he’s clearly uninformed within a conversation
@@aalvarez2914I honestly don’t know how in good faith you can completely destroy his character and worth and then add at the bottom “but I haven’t watched a ton of his stuff”. It’s clear you haven’t, nobody who has would come away from his conversations genuinely believing this. Anybody who has engaged with him knows that he doesn’t just skim through a Wikipedia article, or is purposefully a contrarian. It’s just so so so bad faith
@@chrism6257 If he went outside, he would exposed to all the women who would pounce upon his adonis physique. It's dangerous for him to go outside, because he might drown in all of the female nether fluids.
@Kan-ova I'd feel disgust if I had to shoot someone in self-defence, so your appeal to emotion doesn't really work. If i feel disgust at black people. does that indicate their existence is morally wrong?
I appreciate this more lighthearted and less focused talk on a variety of topics for Steven, i feel hes been through a lot of hard debates recently and this was probably refreshing. Keep those more laser podcasts coming though please Alex, thats why im here. No one disects the truth like you do
Holy shit I loved this conversation between you two. Especially when it came into really digging into principles and how there really is deeper things in question than said broad principle, like how you two brought it up it also largely becomes about what that principle is applying to often even more so than the broad principle itself. Great food for thought here a lot of which I'm probably going to be thinking about for a long time to come and actively applying to my way of thinking. Thank you for this discussion it was fantastic.
Australian here. Compulsory voting reinforces the idea that every vote counts and is why you are lawfully obligated to do so. It makes no sense one minute to say that compulsory voting is bad and the next go on to talk about how it's much better for everyone to vote.
Also Aussie, and Alex even mentions that you can do a donkey vote. People that truly don't care don't have to weigh in, they can just put in an empty slip
Your point is like saying we should have compulsory mandates for everyone to have a job. Sure, we believe that everyone having a job would benefit society, but we shouldn’t make getting a job compulsory
Maybe from Alex, there isn't anything of value to learn from Destiny, he's just a partisan hack that cares nothing about spreading truth. And is genocidal in nature.
what work does destiny do aside from encouraging the israeli genocide of gaza and badly defending israel with the wikipedia articles he reads during his "debates"
@tylerwilliam97 well, it seems you have seen some of Destiny's arguments, done some research to come to your own conclusions, and are willing to expound them publicly. It's not the work Destiny intended to do, but I imagine you feel it has value
@@tylerwilliam97he has never encouraged the Israeli genocide of Gaza. The only thing I’ve heard him say is that what Israel is doing is not a genocide, because if killing the whole population was their goal they would’ve easily done it by now. Genocide is an active attempt to eradicate a people, and Destiny doesn’t see enough evidence that shows Israel’s goal is to kill all palestinians. I can’t speak on how good or bad his defense of Israel is because I don’t know enough about the conflict to qualify any opinions I have. (Something tells me you don’t either if you are this loose with your judgements on Destiny) But that all aside, Destiny’s done some great work speaking out against the red pill/manosphere spaces and showing how they’re wrong in almost every measurable way. He’s done a good job at combating conservatives and their talking points, showing how inconsistent their beliefs can be. These are just a few quick examples but the guy isn’t some raging dipshit like you seem to think.
I love the way both of these humans speak. Whether how they speak to each other, what they talk about, or how they unpack ideas. Just beautiful ideation. Good faith at its core.
Are WE ALL WATCHING THE SAME VIDEO!? These comments are crazy negative, clean yo rooms on foe nem grave HAHAHAHAHHAHAH - On a real note everyone’s somehow smarter than both these guys combined with more degrees than a hot day in july and although this is coming from a person who struggles with 2+ syllable words EVEN I CAN TELL this is mad uncalled for, Alex and Destiny are G’s back off my boyfriends ya Creepo Ono’s⚡️🦍❤️
the only reason i clicked this video was because so many people posted pictures of destiny in a tiny chair and I thought "this can't be true. these pictures must me edited". Nope, tiny chair is real
This grew incredibly more frustrating as they were unable to admit of any principles that weren't absolute. I get that that's standard in the US, but other countries like France have rights or principles that need to be balanced against each other, which seems so much more sensible way to judge things. For example, you have a right to free speech, but that runs into somebody else's right to not be lied about. You have a right to swing your fist, it ends at somebody else's face. Many rights are contraposed to other people's rights, and if you view any of them as absolute, it will end in absurdity. Once you get away from the fact that a right needs to be absolute to exist, then we can have more productive discussions. But it sounds like they only made it maybe halfway there.
You have not said anything pointing to much difference between the French and US systems. There is no protection in the US from libel and no protection from the consequences of punching someone.
Yea this is pointed out in Thomas Paine's letters in the book, "Rights of Man". Something alone the lines of one's rights end at someone else's rights to live peacefully.
@@sethivaltas619 nope, I mean back-of-a-spoon lens. It’s a made up lens that makes you look like you’re looking in the back of a spoon. It’s is convex but specifically like the back of a spoon with is much more distorted than a simple convex. But you kind of ruined it now so I take it back. You forced my hand… …girls name.
If Jordan Peterson ever answered a question directly, the invites to future discussion/debates would slow to a trickle or stop completely. He's totally on board with the idea that two people are showing up for an event, but only one is expected to clearly communicate what side they're on and defend it. (And it's the other guy.) It's nice that people want to be charitable and give him the benefit of the doubt, but he is evasive and he does obfuscate. He understands the question he was just asked. The context was obvious. It's actually difficult to imagine it's anything other than it was. Alex mentions at around 02:08:40, that when he's preparing for a discussion with Jordan he has to consider all of the possible ways his questions might be derailed. Jordan doesn't need to prepare for other people derailing HIS questions. He. Knows. What. He's. Doing.
Obviously I would love for Alex to have torn into JP in the same way that perhaps Destiny did but I think even beyond that it is of some value to try and come to a conclusion on his behalf if only to then present him with the idea to see if he agrees, because if he does not, then clearly something is amiss.
If Peterson evades and obfuscates, he does this for his audience. If he would be straight it would cost him his christian fanboys. You must bear in mind that he merely caters to people who want to hear something that reinforces their own opinion.
Unfortunately, Peterson turns into the academic post-modernists he so despises once religion comes up. Just like the Social Justice fanatics, he touts religion as true not because he believes it, but because he thinks believing in it serves a positive utility.
Very surprised this comments section is this tame compared to the one where Alex posted that the video is coming. Bunch of hate comments on that one for no good reason.
Thank you so much for putting the clip in with the Peterson moment! It’s extra effort but such a nice tough, really. I hate having to click off and find something like that
That the internet was created by public funds really should be the end of this debate. Aside from the creation of the ARPANET, that became the internet, the fiber optic cable networks built for it to run on were also made possible by public funds. Money collected by phone companies for public infrastructure is what was used along with other federal funds. All public money for what should be public infrastructure'. That both were created and made possible using public funds and serve a critical public need should be end of the debate. They are public utilities - regardless of who owns them.
Public infrastructure is the fiber optic cables not the companies which use it. Imagine a water company that uses public utility water from the city and has a patented process they do to the water. No reasonable person would argue that the use of the city water means the processed water should be public utility by extension. It is the same with the internet (at least it used to be before net neutrality was significantly gutted) just because a company sends data through public infrastructure it does not mean that the company should be considered a utility.
Retard comment 🤣 Whether or not something was or wasn't funded by stolen taxpayer money has fuck all to do with legitimising it. You aren't owed anything that someone else has to provide.
@@liberalbias4462"I wanna be the meat in an Alex/Destiny sandwich" or "these two guys could DP me any time" would be gay. Also this entire response, I'm pretty gay. 🎉🎉🎉
The printing press was a new form of media that had drastic changes on the world. It made the protestant reformation possible, and there was a big war in Europe over that. The world has growing pains with each new media. I trust that eventually we'll work our way through this new change as well.
Its neither voting is just logical lets say there's a 1/100,000,000 chance that your vote was the deciding one then if yours wins you get 4 years where 300,000,000 people are ruled by better laws for 4 years this seems like a pretty good deal to me
@@connorvic3 First of all, if you are talking about the United States, then unless you live in a swing state, the odds that your vote will decide the election are more like 1 in 100 trillion. Second of all, even if you do live in a swing state, the odds that the election will turn on one vote is still far less than 1 in 100 million. Third, this calculus only makes sense for a utilitarian. Fourth, you need to take account how much better the laws would be. If they marginally improve the lives of a handful of people, obviously it's illogical to go out and vote on the 1 in less than 100 million chance it will make a difference. Fifth, you need to take into account uncertainty. How certain are you that this election will actually make the difference you think it will make?
We could have every vote be worth an equal amount (1 in 100 million) by doing sortition (1 random persons vote is selected). But you're wrong about the swing state part. Mathematically, if the election is close (it is in 2016, 2020, 2024) there must be a state where a voter has more than a 1 in 100 million chance of swinging the election
Alex, consider adding an introduction to your podcasts. It’s a bit jarring to jump right into a lengthy discussion and it would be nice to hear some background info on each guest.
Australian here. I support compulsory voting, even if you spoil the ballot. Why? Because: 1. Voting no longer becomes a question of which party can game the system through “get out the vote” efforts. 2. I think - even with the tiny amount of donkey votes - it creates a situation where the level of political awareness across society is higher. This tends to help us avoid political extremism. Unrelated, but here in Australia we make it easy to vote. Election day is on the weekend, polling sites are extremely plentiful, and there are mail in options. Employers are required to allow you to vote - on election day this is your priority.
As an Australian I much prefer our system. Fully preferential voting, so the winner will get at least 50% of the vote, meaning that the majority of people have chosen them. Compulsory voting is based on a different view of voting, and civil liberty. Voting isn't a right, its your duty. Hence its compulsory. You don't have to cast a valid vote though. But I think making it compulsory also means that people end up more interested, and more knowledgable, because they have to vote, it makes the normally disinterested person feel like they ought to learn and know how to vote in a way thats best for them.
You need to look into why voting was made compulsory in Australia. It has nothing to do with it being a "civil duty". If you talk to the average Australian about politics, they have next to no idea unless they've read a headline or watch the 6pm news. I bet you would struggle to find Australians that could name the 3 branches of government. The same with thinking they have a right to freedom of speech.
@@quartermainegames its exactly why now., thats why we've kept compulsory voting, because it a duty. Which ironically destiny argues further on in this video anyway, wanting to make people vote lol. That might be true of the baby boomer or older generation, or the older gen x's. But its not true of people born post 1975. First of all newspaper readership is at all time low and declining, same with television viewing, hell Channel 10 is switching off their mildura transmission. People are far more proactively interested in politics in Australia than you seem to think. You also put a lot of stock of knowing the three branches of government which isn't really required for understanding current politics and people's interests. All of that notwithstanding that that has been taught as part of the school curriculum for the last 4 decades at least, SOSE is taught around the country and covers that. Not that knowing Executive, Legislative and Judicial or Federal, State and Local. The majority of particularly young people are very proactive about politics. And yes there is no codified right to free speech within a bill of rights, there is still an inherent right to free speech, expression, protest and religion as part of other laws and acts, human rights etc. You're acting as if we have no free speech at all, and if that were the case Australia would be a very very different country. But its not, we live in a free society.
@@PBMS123 I'm sorry, but "we live in a free society." Really? After what happened during the lockdowns, you're really going to say that!? We absolutely do need a codified bill of rights, to say otherwise is ignorant or trolling. I'm not going to address anything else you've said, because I'm concerned you're trolling. But if you think we live in a "free" society, maybe you need to look at some of the insane laws that have been passed in the last few years, then get back to me and say Australians actually care about politics.
@@quartermainegames oh please.... get fucked. This is such a bad faith argument that just dismisses a deadly pandemic as nothing while you claim that we're not free. Please, pull the other one. Its called a social contract.... Did you even watch this video? We don't and can't live in a purely libertarian utopia, because that doesn't exist, it can't exist. We had a duty to protect people, and being the first actual global pandemic in 100 years, sure there were teething pains, but lockdowns verifiably, statistically saved lives. Sometimes we as a society have to make temporary sacrifices for the greater good. "After what happened during the lockdowns". You can today still protest, we still have free and fair elections, you can criticise all the politicians who enacted lockdowns without fear of becoming a political prisoner. You're acting like everything is so bad when you can't be bothered to go and look at what a non free country looks like. It was a public health emergency. People were dying. I'm concerned you're trolling, hard, because you're that goddamn blind to what an actually unfree society looks like, and the horror that people that live in those societies face everyday. The fact you think the lockdowns in the face of a pandemic somehow change that, despite basically every other developed nation on earth enacting similar policies, is bonkers, and could only come from trolling, or sheer unbridled ignorance. I never said we didn't "need" a bill of rights at all, please show me where I said that. I said that just because we don't doesn't mean freedom of speech isn't well accepted in the country as an inherent right. Our country isn't perfect, but it sure beats living in China, or Afghanistan, or insert any other actually subjugated country on earth. Laws are passed by the legistlature, not people, we don't live in a direct democracy where we are asked to make a decision about everything, which from your statements I would think you would want if you think people don't care. People do care about politics, thats why the libs lost so poorly the last election, and why the major parties lost so many seats to independents. You want to use some bs scare and shock jock crap about the lockdowns and because that doesn't agree with you, you think I'm trolling, to say you wont address anything I've said because you likely don't have an answer? Get over yourself, you look a gift horse in the mouth, and throw the baby out with the bath water, over a once in a century event that governments all over the world had to do as well. Could things have been done better, sure, but I never said they were perfect, you seem to lobbing a bunch of unheard bullshit onto me, because you have such a terrible and dichotic view of politics or your own view, a.k.a. "My opinion is the correct one, everyone else is just trolling". GF'd mate, get over yourself. You're response to me was just "errrhhmmerrhhgerrd lockdowns." things could have been done better, but it wouldn't have changed the need for lockdowns. People e.g. you; need to realise they live within a society with many other people. Dealing with a pandemic is not the same or as straight forward as building roads my god. This reeks of someone with more interest and care for themselves the rest of his common man and common society as a whole, and reeks of the "I've got mine, fuck you" attitude that permeates so much of America, and every person who claims to be a libertarian. Maybe watch the video and learn a thing or 2. You are not being oppressed here. Not even close. Maybe when you die when you're over 90 years old because of good healthcare and the scientific method, and if you still have a you centric view of the world and rights, if heaven does exist, maybe go complain to the thousands of people who died at the hands of actually oppressive societies and governments, go complain to the victims of tiananmen square about how bad you had it when you had to go in lockdown, not actual lockdown, but where you could still go out and exercise, get food etc. you just couldn't hang around in large groups for no reason in an attempt to try to save the lives of others.
Even if I don't agree with all of your perspectives, I have to say that you do a wonderful job showing potential biases and presuppositions. Just wanted to mention it considering these conversations are helping me to think about my own standings and how I can better fight against self-inflicted inconsistencies and biases in my own logic.
Isn't the chance of corruption necessarily greater the larger the organization? Large organizations lose a ton of resources with checks and balances to combat this
I know its not about this video but its the most recent one so maybe i have a chance you read this comment. I would love to see a debate between you and Sabine Hossenfelder about the fine tuning argument and many other things. You are both my favorite youtubers so it would be amazing❤
Whoa Destiny is really good at answering on the spot with challenging questions. Like Alex's talkin points are mainly recycled from previous videos (Just stop oil) ... but I imagine destiny is talkin about this kinda stuff for the 1st time? Not that I always agree with him, but it's refreshin to see people come up with new points on the spot. Maybe I'm just so used to the religion vids where we've already heard everything since they've been around since like 2008.
Reliability is a virtue. In that sense saying "I appreciate that my opponent stands up for their beliefs" could be taken as asserting that the opponent obtains that virtue, the virtue of reliability.
@dannyvoid better to reliably be something we don't like. As opposed to be unreliable. I know what to do with reliably horrible people. Unreliable people fool others more easily
@@Mr.Braggadociowhat if someone goes against their principles (that you don’t like) to do things that you do like. They’re continuously going against their principles but you’d prefer that to them sticking to the undesirable ones.
@@Mr.Braggadocio what if it’s not reliable, they are occasionally breaking bad principles to do good things, would you say they’d be more virtuous if they just stuck to their principles?
Not exaggerating or trying to glaze, these are the two people on the internet who I respect the thought processes of most, and glean most from their normal talking. Alex in his honest attempts to underand, and Destiny in his thouroughness. Anyway, I haven't seen him do it, but I actually would expect Jordan Peterson to have a bit of a long answer to "what is a woman", though maybe not quite endless. He does sometimes have answers that give "I've thought about this a lot and come up with a detailed answer I find pretty good". Especially with all his Jungian and evo psyche stuff, I could definitely see him coming up with something. I think it was a brilliant insight Alex said about Jordan, in that he's probably mostly talked to people who respect him and just silently try to follow what he's saying, and people that just call him evil and dumb. I've always thought when he gives round about answers, he was trying to not let the convo lead somewhere he thought is inappropriate to the subject or something. But it totally makes sense that he would only get validation from people who see any value in him and that would spur him on. We're all socially conditioned, me commenting this and you reading this. It was a great idea for Alex to try that middle position.
He has always been extreme. He only controls himself when he is interviewed or dealing with important people. Jordan Peterson debate: stayed cool on stage, afterwards on his own channel started bashing JP like crazy. People who only see him on other channels have better view of him than they would otherwise.
@@Novarcharesk mhh i dont think so realy. its more opportunism. its seems he has little problem being very direct and confrontational with people if he sees fit.
@user-pi4qo3zc2e You have clearly never watched any of the thousands of hours of hos own content that's available on his channel or you would make such a silly statement as this.
Alex is calm, collected and introspective and really gives space to discuss. I reckon he is someone you'd want around when you're problem solving and want to find a balanced and fair, moral solution ✌
2:11:50 I absolutely love Alex‘ analogy here. I never thought Peterson was trying to obfuscate things unnecessarily; quite the opposite. Once you pushed through his initial „resistance“, the conversation led to much more meaningful and deep insights than if he just answered „Yes, I do think it happened historically“.
I found it to be a bad defense. No respectable quantum physicist would have difficulty explaining an interaction to a child. They can provide a framework that is as understandable as 'balls bouncing' while pointing out exactly that there are complications like 'the ball doesn't quite touch'. Every single physics textbook in the history of the world provided 'approximate a cow as a sphere' without obfuscating that the cow is not actually a sphere. Whether Peterson was trying to obfuscate, I don't take a position on, I just think Alex's defense analogy was pretty silly. In fact physicists would agree on the majority that reductive models are helpful rather than harmful for explaining complex phenomena.
Regardless of the analogy i think Alex navigated his JP conversation very well. He didn't see him coming in with bad faith. Got him to explain why he doesn't answer straight and then proceeded to answer it according to his own epistemology and in a straight forward manner.
@@michaelc.5327 But Jordan Peterson wasn‘t speaking to a child. He was engaged in an intellectual conversation; why would he reduce his position to a simple version thereof?
@@SergiusGBE One can have the perspective or knowlege of a child without being a child in specific niche areas. for instance I could ask you what the Holy Roman Empire is. Let's also say you don't know but you want or need to learn. Now i could instantly go into detail about its formation, Charlemaigne, the relationship with the papacy and so on, but if you didn't know about charlemaigne, the papacy or geopolitics of middle ages europe its probably not going to help you. So instead I could give a very reductionist, but mostly true, statement that it was a loose german coalition from the middle ages to the 19th century where small individual german states within the empire had high degrees of autonomy, but still pledged to help each other in times of war, and had to pledge allegiance to an emperor. You now have a very rough idea of what it is, and a foundation for further learning should the want or need arise. This is essentially the same as the analogy in physics for children, but of course applied to a different scenario, which most adults wouldn't know about.
The south park episode douche vs turd outlined the bully friends to go and vote when as soon as stan (I think) decides he is gonna vote for cartmans choice and not kyles, then kyle is upset and doesn't want him to vote.
Enriching conversation! I will hold only one principle from now on: watching Alex‘ podcast every time it comes out, even if it means the world has to end ;)
![WE GOT ACCESS TO GPT-3! [Epic Special Edition]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/iccd86vOz3w/mqdefault.jpg)
Get all sides of every story and be better informed at ground.news/AlexOC - subscribe for 40% off unlimited access.
Follow my new substack: www.alexoconnor.com
The Internet should be 100% freedom of speech
You are wrong about the fact that Peterson has no problem giving a short answer to the definition of woman. He clearly stated that this is an incredibly complicated question I think (in a Convo with Matt Walsh)
you are a gay little youtube shill or you would talk to people with opinions that matter. go debate nick fuentes, or anyone who is serious about the JQ. no, instead you talk to wastes of air like destiny. I shit on people like you. fake ass nggas.
Why do you look like you’ve got 5X less testosterone than all males from human history? You make the west look so weak.
What does ground news do about truth? If Trump gets 50% of people to believe the moon is made of cheese, would ground news start to say that NASA papers have a left wing bias?
Destiny has aged spectacularly well considering the fact that his child was already performing concerts in the 90s.
Finally someone making new joke
Underrated
Holy shit new joke
@@ashspeaks1i dont get the joke 😢 what
@@annieyesiam2758a band callled Destiny’s child that formed in the 1990’s
Putting Destiny in that chair is blatant sabotage.
His head to shoulders ratio is so quack. LUL
Heh, I think it is more the fault of Destiny's bad posture. Hopefully he works on that.
He looks like a tiny little person. I was only listening to this. Not watching. But i looked at the comments and had to look when i saw this and omg it's hilarious😂😂
@@sathrielsatanson Bro, try sitting with perfect posture in a chair like that without looking like an anxious autist. They're actual videographical sabotage, you either lean forward and perch on the outer rim like a pigeon, or you melt into the oversized seat of the chair like a slovenly gnome.
Big head... Big brains 🧠 But all things have a price
This conversation kind of boils down to "the average person isn't actually engaging in complex thought"
Destiny has nothing more really to say. He thinks because he has money and time that makes him a critical thinker. I dont understand how anybody can be convinced by the intellectual jerking off of being a rational-scientific debate bro.
@@felixmuller9672 I can understand not liking him but thinking he is stupid is a self report
@@Scorned where did i state that?
@@felixmuller9672 please articulate your position further with examples and why Destiny is wrong.
@@yupimawesome hes wrong and gay actually
Joe Rogan calls him a Wikipedia warrior, but Terrence Howard a genius lmao
Well Joe likes controversial figures and people who think differently . Destiny being a Wikipedia warrior is just a insignificant smug .
@@RupeshKumar-ni1vd Or in other words "which person would my fanbase of υnedυcated manchildren like the most". quite smart.
@@neworderadherentif your idea of "educated" means using Wikipedia, well we'll just leave it there.
@@curiositycloset2359 Oh he said that reading a few Wikipedia articles makes someone educated? He said that? That's something he actually said and it isn't something you just made up?
Why don't you engage with the meat of the argument? Joe platforms and praises people who likely have actual brain damage. Joe doesn't seem to like people who think carefully about anything. Why don't you address that?
Lol man children. Girl just admit you're bitter 😂 Destiny is genuinely disabled mentally, and that's your rock? Bub.... He doesn't think, he "feels" shit. He doesn't have an ounce of intelligence, that actually means anything. I genuinely tried to give this guy a fair shake. I couldn't stand 5 minutes of his incessant ranting, without facts. Even the way he talks, he can't help but let his leftist, feable mind, guide him to his opinion.
You're every reason why true democracy, is a cancer.
Also, since you're so superior, how about you indulge all of us in your educational experience. Would love to see a university link to your master's degree. How about a successful business? Lobbying group that is still active? Anything?
Don't throw stones darlin. Your walls are crumbling. @@neworderadherent
took 73 episodes for alex to finally have a black woman on, think about that...
Destiny is a womans name remember that
Glad he's being inclusive to the fellow lesbian activists
these will never be funny
@@time_warp_angel I find it funny
@@JackBurtonsHaulageCono one cares
Alex O’Conners impression of Peterson had me dying, when he did the hands thing lol
the hands were such a good detail
Timestamp?
@@AdvancedSquadLeaderI’d start at 2:03:50
I only vaguely listened the first time and it felt like he was making a joke, but now it's obvious 🤣
The discussion about the importance of voting only really framed it in a large-scale way, like voting for presidencies. But folks need to remember that local elections are often of incredible impact to your day-to-day and sometimes only a few hundred people are voting on the issue. Your vote has a much larger proportional impact on local elections, which are arguably of larger consequence.
Very true. Local elections are not talked about nearly enough.
Your vote has less sway over the results of a national election, but those results are of greater consequence.
Local elections are less consequential, but in some cases, you and your friends could get together and flip the election.
and many people forget….Gore lost to Bush because of 537 votes in Florida
These two tools don't even know what Peterson was trying to say. Yet they think their formulating a retort against it? Couple of tards
@@sammyismuff It depends on what you mean by local elections. Governor and city council and mayoral elections can have a huge impact on things like HOUSING and transportation. You can vote for certain judges which might be the difference between a bunch of rec drug users spending a lot of time in jails (costing taxpayers a ton of money in the process) vs spending that time with their spouse and kids. You might be able to vote for the local sheriff which could be the difference between a lot of poor people getting their stuff stolen during a traffic stop and being able to pay their monthly rent (some of them become homeless as a consequence). And there are even less prioritized institutions which have local elections that can be very important like ones related to schooling, which is important to everyone whether the youth is indoctrinated or taught proper critical thinking skills and self improvement skills etc.
It's not the president or even senators or congressmen who are responsible for how many homeless people there are, or how many people OD, or how many food deserts there are, how bad the minimum wage laws or work safety laws might be, or how often the power goes out when the weather is bad. They can pass things to put a bandage on the problem but a lot of problems come from these more local institutions not prioritizing the majority of their people. State's rights can be good and it can be bad, people have to vote to make it good.
destiny doesn't look very gigantism here
that camera angle plus 46:52 out of context... GOLD
@@ludvig5597LOL 😂
@@ludvig5597😂
30:38
@@benauxo 🤐
“Everything you do in life will be insignificant, but it’s important that you do it”
-Gandhi
The entire conversation around voting had me thinking of this. Destiny preaching the Gandhi message
He's too much of a scumbag to even deserve any connection.
Yes, it's important for you to waste your time/energy spinning your wheels rather than actually getting anywhere - did the British tell Gandhi to say that? xD
humiliating 😂😂😂😂😂
@@3nertiaGandhi successful lead the campaign for indian independence from british rule from that insignificants
@@solaireastora5394 All evidence to the contrary ...
Who owns India today? Gandhi was just a puppet and you believe propaganda over reality ...
Destiny looks like if Deadpool got beheaded and now he's sitting in a chair waiting for his body to grow back to adult size.
I love you guys so much, this one made my day 😭😭😭
These comments killin me, why is that chair so fucking tiny 😭😭
He a court jester
I was only hearing it, at 1:45:27 is when I realized that Alex looks like he's talking to a child omg
What an intellectually stimulating comment. 🤨
Destiny's style went from NEET gamer to GTA Vice City character
He lives in Miami after all
Gta vice city character is hilarious
Miami Steve
Destiny always seemed to me like more of a Captain America before the serum, kind of guy.
He's Cuban
Bro is not dodging the Peter Dinklage comparisons now
This conversation was SUCH a treat. I dont think I've laughed on a philosophy podcast as much as today. I like when you nad steven talk. Feels like two differently backgrounded friends just exploring
you're very easily treated
@@murkartik thank you
“Exploring” 🙄 they just like hearing themselves talk
Why are you laughing tho? Are you ok?
@@ParkerBG Have you never had an actual conversation before?
Omg, why did Alex gave him such a little chair, looks ridiculous 😭
The chair isn't little, if you look at the seat levels from the ground, they are the same height, only the chair backs are different heights. Destiny is 5'8 and Alex is... tall, I don't know how much exactly but probably around 6'2.
Notice the size of Alex's chair. Power move.
The missing back of the chair really does make Destiny look ridiculous. That and he stupid hair do
Why does Destiny’s torso look so small but his head looks so big in proportion?
@@Vitamin.Z A smart man in a small body
I just found out that Jordan Peterson was asked "What is a woman" once, and his answer was "Marry one and find out"
lmaoo that is a hilarious response. When you are married to women you end up finding the most intimate things about them that you might not as parent or siblings or friends.
Oh yeah I forgot that. Ironically despite the chatter around the boilerplate answer he might give, Destiny uploaded a video where he discusses what this is actually a better answer than the shit he's talking about in this conversation. Perhaps he had forgotten. Lol
@@confounded_feline Source please?
@@noorzanayasmin7806it's from the what is a woman documentary with matt Walsh. If you do Jordan peterson what is a woman. It should be the top result.
@@JohnDavidSullivan okay thanks
My favorite response that I heard to what would convince you that God is real came from Matt Dillahunty when he said “I don’t know, but if God is real, he would know and if it was important for me to know him, he’d know how to convince me he’s real”
that doesn't address the problem of the question though no? Wasn't the purpose of that thought experiment to check how biased your thinking is on the subject, if you couldn't possibly think of a way god could change your mind, then something is clearly wrong. The question wasn't whether or not god could change your mind, because that's obvious, if god existed, your mind could just be changed through will alone if god wanted it to be.
@@ragegaze3482 the answer to the question is literally the first line "i dont know"
@@ragegaze3482 Yeah that's true, it just works for me on a personal level when dealing with friends and family. I think the Boghossian method they discussed is a pretty good way to weed out bias and I could think of arguments that could move me somewhat to the other side, but I could always argue myself back again due to having arrived at my personal bias through years of argumentation.
@@ragegaze3482 That may have been the purpose of the thought experiment but if it was it totally fails. If someone ask you what would convince you that 2 plus 2 equals 3 and you could not possibly think of something then that is not evidence of bias its just evidence that you are intellectually incapable of coming up with a way to prove something so absurd. The actual purpose of the thought experiment is an attempt to make you give an argument for the existence of god so the apologist does not have to.
Seems like a delusional self important ass thought that one up
*Insert strong judgmental evaluation of video before I could possibly have seen the video.*
unbelievably true
ACTUALLY, bononilly supports the genocide of Terran's and promotes military tactics such as 'retard baiting'. I heard so on tiktoks so he is wrong in this video, spamming marines takes real skill.
i think it's not a totally unfair reaction given that destiny is a genocidal freak
@@tylerwilliam97 And you a terrorist apologetic. See, not only two, everyone can play that game.
@@tylerwilliam97says who?
2:13:40 as a physics undergraduate, I honestly dismiss this 'objects don't actually touch' point by asking 'what do you mean by touch', ironically enough.
yeah its a terrible analogy by alex, we have reductive models to provide insights into complex phenomena. A quantum physicist would be able to explain why approximating a moving cow as a sphere is helpful while also being able to explain what makes the model wrong.
@michaelc.5327 Some people say alcohol's a drug. It's not a drug; it's a drink.
@@tcritt Alcohol is a disinhibitor, depending on the amount it can make you potentially numb like certain drugs, but it's main characteristics is that you don't care about consequences of your actions ...
but it's pretty clear the question that would be asked by 99.99% would be regarding the edge of the object having exactly 0 distance to the other objects edge, however deep we can define edge and object?
@@valkiyri I'm quoting a comedy sketch, you utterly boring individual.
25:43
- It cænt be this way
- You mean it c𝒂n't?
- It cænt be the case
- That's interesting. So it's not "it c𝒂n't"?
🤣
The beauty of language
Aluminum can't be the best way to hold methane
No no no, you’re getting it wrong. It’s “it Kant be this way”
Eh, "tomayto"/"tomahto"
Its Alex's only flaw. Hes br*tish 🤢
Destiny is a name for a political streamer
Generally an uninformed or misinformed streamer, depending on what BS he’s rationalizing for, that day… He seems a bit more polite and rational than usual here, talking with Alex though. Usually he’s just confidently spouting his opinions as fact, using some Wikipedia article it seems like he skimmed over that day to “prepare” for the debate.. I’ve usually only seen him debate conservatives he has a serious beef with though, where it seems like his goal is just to contradict everything the other person says regardless of what’s true or not. I haven’t watch a ton of his stiff though.
@@aalvarez2914give an example of when he’s intentionally being wrong just to contradict his opponent
@@aalvarez2914scizopost of the day! Congrats! You disagree w someone on the internet!
@@aalvarez2914give an example where his supposed reliance on Wikipedia has actually cost him in a conversation, or an example where he’s clearly uninformed within a conversation
@@aalvarez2914I honestly don’t know how in good faith you can completely destroy his character and worth and then add at the bottom “but I haven’t watched a ton of his stuff”. It’s clear you haven’t, nobody who has would come away from his conversations genuinely believing this. Anybody who has engaged with him knows that he doesn’t just skim through a Wikipedia article, or is purposefully a contrarian. It’s just so so so bad faith
2:04:50 Seeing Alex imitate JBP's mannerisms when he starts tweakin is one of the most funny things i've seen this year lol
Really!!?? Humm, you need to get out more.
@@chrism6257 Nah i'm good.
@@chrism6257 If he went outside, he would exposed to all the women who would pounce upon his adonis physique. It's dangerous for him to go outside, because he might drown in all of the female nether fluids.
@@chrism6257maybe you need to get in more 😤
He did it so naturally too haha - it was only until he did that one specific hand movement I was like oh this is Jordan Peterson 😂
To be honest, considering Alex's last discussion with Destiny on ethics I really didn't think I would be agreeing this often with Destiny as I did.
What did you disagree with destiny in the ethics discussion? I felt he did pretty well there
@Kan-ovaI'm pretty sure Destiny was just biting the bullet and trying to maintain consistency and doesn't actually feel that way about animals
@@Scammer-01 vegan gains fuming right now
@@lordmew5 he literally looked like a retard in that debate, what are you on?
@Kan-ova I'd feel disgust if I had to shoot someone in self-defence, so your appeal to emotion doesn't really work. If i feel disgust at black people. does that indicate their existence is morally wrong?
I'm sure this comment section will be wonderful.
Just like your mom's 🐈 is
Reading youtube comments is one of the fastest ways to go insane, why am I here...
I literally scrolled 10 comments and realized it's such a waste of time. There is nothing intellectual here
Think again
@@ronpudding9598 just like your mom
I appreciate this more lighthearted and less focused talk on a variety of topics for Steven, i feel hes been through a lot of hard debates recently and this was probably refreshing. Keep those more laser podcasts coming though please Alex, thats why im here. No one disects the truth like you do
Alex and Steven look like brothers who constantly fought as children and now begrudgingly have polite conversations over the holidays.
Holy shit I loved this conversation between you two. Especially when it came into really digging into principles and how there really is deeper things in question than said broad principle, like how you two brought it up it also largely becomes about what that principle is applying to often even more so than the broad principle itself.
Great food for thought here a lot of which I'm probably going to be thinking about for a long time to come and actively applying to my way of thinking. Thank you for this discussion it was fantastic.
Loved this conversation, it just got better and better, wasn’t bored at any point ❤️
Alex's Jordan Peterson impression😂😂
Someone please time stamp this cuz I missed it.
Please, somebody time-stamp it
@@absolutenothing7094 2:04:20 He has to have done this a lot to be that good at it.
always fun to listen to both
Australian here. Compulsory voting reinforces the idea that every vote counts and is why you are lawfully obligated to do so.
It makes no sense one minute to say that compulsory voting is bad and the next go on to talk about how it's much better for everyone to vote.
Also Aussie, and Alex even mentions that you can do a donkey vote. People that truly don't care don't have to weigh in, they can just put in an empty slip
Your point is like saying we should have compulsory mandates for everyone to have a job. Sure, we believe that everyone having a job would benefit society, but we shouldn’t make getting a job compulsory
Should all things that are better for people to do be compulsory?
@@RayWilliamJohnson95Paying taxes are compulsory. They are meant to serve the community and thw common good. Much like more people voting would.
@@blahblahbag8715no. only voting. and paying taxes.
2:04:12 is genuinely so hilarious -- The rest of the conversation was quite edifying too. Thank you!
Maybe from Alex, there isn't anything of value to learn from Destiny, he's just a partisan hack that cares nothing about spreading truth. And is genocidal in nature.
Is Destiny turning into Alex or Alex turning into Destiny in the thumbnail picture?
Thanks!
Great discussion. I appreciate the work that both of you do.
Also, Billy the Blue Ranger called. He wants his belt back.
what work does destiny do aside from encouraging the israeli genocide of gaza and badly defending israel with the wikipedia articles he reads during his "debates"
@tylerwilliam97 well, it seems you have seen some of Destiny's arguments, done some research to come to your own conclusions, and are willing to expound them publicly. It's not the work Destiny intended to do, but I imagine you feel it has value
@@tylerwilliam97he has never encouraged the Israeli genocide of Gaza. The only thing I’ve heard him say is that what Israel is doing is not a genocide, because if killing the whole population was their goal they would’ve easily done it by now. Genocide is an active attempt to eradicate a people, and Destiny doesn’t see enough evidence that shows Israel’s goal is to kill all palestinians.
I can’t speak on how good or bad his defense of Israel is because I don’t know enough about the conflict to qualify any opinions I have. (Something tells me you don’t either if you are this loose with your judgements on Destiny)
But that all aside, Destiny’s done some great work speaking out against the red pill/manosphere spaces and showing how they’re wrong in almost every measurable way. He’s done a good job at combating conservatives and their talking points, showing how inconsistent their beliefs can be. These are just a few quick examples but the guy isn’t some raging dipshit like you seem to think.
@@LordGrantius that’s an interesting perspective to look through. Nicely done👌
@@tylerwilliam97 Nice bait
I love the way both of these humans speak. Whether how they speak to each other, what they talk about, or how they unpack ideas. Just beautiful ideation. Good faith at its core.
Great stuff, one of my favorite conversation combos, love you both
been waiting for this collab.
You know Alex has interviewed Destiny before right?
@@stevesmith4901 Nobody on UA-cam generally knows anything. Which s why we are on UA-cam.
@@kevinjohnson1427i don’t know if I agree, but you certainly got me to cackle
Are WE ALL WATCHING THE SAME VIDEO!? These comments are crazy negative, clean yo rooms on foe nem grave HAHAHAHAHHAHAH - On a real note everyone’s somehow smarter than both these guys combined with more degrees than a hot day in july and although this is coming from a person who struggles with 2+ syllable words EVEN I CAN TELL this is mad uncalled for, Alex and Destiny are G’s back off my boyfriends ya Creepo Ono’s⚡️🦍❤️
lol never would have expected to see you here
@@ash1eyroseHAHAH SAME BUT I DO LOVE ME SOME ALEX
the only reason i clicked this video was because so many people posted pictures of destiny in a tiny chair and I thought "this can't be true. these pictures must me edited". Nope, tiny chair is real
So is his def0rmed, ET physique 😂.
@@invincible8115 touch grass if your think an average guy is deformed. the internet isn't doing you any good
Another great episode, love the energy of your conversations with Steven. Ethics and Politics, what next?
Alex doing a Peterson impression was so incredible
This grew incredibly more frustrating as they were unable to admit of any principles that weren't absolute. I get that that's standard in the US, but other countries like France have rights or principles that need to be balanced against each other, which seems so much more sensible way to judge things. For example, you have a right to free speech, but that runs into somebody else's right to not be lied about. You have a right to swing your fist, it ends at somebody else's face. Many rights are contraposed to other people's rights, and if you view any of them as absolute, it will end in absurdity.
Once you get away from the fact that a right needs to be absolute to exist, then we can have more productive discussions. But it sounds like they only made it maybe halfway there.
You have not said anything pointing to much difference between the French and US systems. There is no protection in the US from libel and no protection from the consequences of punching someone.
Yea this is pointed out in Thomas Paine's letters in the book, "Rights of Man". Something alone the lines of one's rights end at someone else's rights to live peacefully.
This was very engaging, despite there being so much agreement. You two are definitely my current favs so this was a treat.
That is arguably the most devious angle you could put on someone. Poor Destiny - he looks like a smurf
It’s the back-of-a-spoon lens.
I think he could care less while he's counting his millions
@@Theactivepsychosyou mean convex?
@@sethivaltas619 nope, I mean back-of-a-spoon lens. It’s a made up lens that makes you look like you’re looking in the back of a spoon. It’s is convex but specifically like the back of a spoon with is much more distorted than a simple convex. But you kind of ruined it now so I take it back. You forced my hand…
…girls name.
@@Theactivepsychos wouldn’t a distorted convex lens still be convex though? Like whaaat bro
Edit: don’t forget *strong black woman* as well lol
Glad I hung in there! Well the whole talk was good, but the Peterson roast at the end was gold.
If Jordan Peterson ever answered a question directly, the invites to future discussion/debates would slow to a trickle or stop completely.
He's totally on board with the idea that two people are showing up for an event, but only one is expected to clearly communicate what side they're on and defend it.
(And it's the other guy.)
It's nice that people want to be charitable and give him the benefit of the doubt, but he is evasive and he does obfuscate. He understands the question he was just asked. The context was obvious. It's actually difficult to imagine it's anything other than it was.
Alex mentions at around 02:08:40, that when he's preparing for a discussion with Jordan he has to consider all of the possible ways his questions might be derailed. Jordan doesn't need to prepare for other people derailing HIS questions.
He. Knows. What. He's. Doing.
Obviously I would love for Alex to have torn into JP in the same way that perhaps Destiny did but I think even beyond that it is of some value to try and come to a conclusion on his behalf if only to then present him with the idea to see if he agrees, because if he does not, then clearly something is amiss.
This was a great conversation to see what Destiny is actually about, great conversation
ah, the oh-so mellifluous and soothing tones of Destiny.
Amazing conversation, i feel like Destiny and Alex are two of the most reasonable and logical people on youtube today
Amazing conversation!
If Peterson evades and obfuscates, he does this for his audience. If he would be straight it would cost him his christian fanboys. You must bear in mind that he merely caters to people who want to hear something that reinforces their own opinion.
Or perhaps his secular fanboys. Hmmm 🤔
@@SiwarRios exactly, he ain't kicking any fans in the shins.
Unfortunately, Peterson turns into the academic post-modernists he so despises once religion comes up. Just like the Social Justice fanatics, he touts religion as true not because he believes it, but because he thinks believing in it serves a positive utility.
Very surprised this comments section is this tame compared to the one where Alex posted that the video is coming. Bunch of hate comments on that one for no good reason.
Mostly real fans here now, come back in a few days for your dose of hate lol.
Their comments were literally about how they were going to skip this video….because they weren’t interested in listening to Destiny….
❤
Most of it wasn't hate, just people being critical.
Haters take longer to show up. Come back in a week.
"No good reason," lol
Two people I always enjoy watching discuss issues. Keep up the great work guys 👍
Thank you so much for putting the clip in with the Peterson moment! It’s extra effort but such a nice tough, really. I hate having to click off and find something like that
That the internet was created by public funds really should be the end of this debate. Aside from the creation of the ARPANET, that became the internet, the fiber optic cable networks built for it to run on were also made possible by public funds. Money collected by phone companies for public infrastructure is what was used along with other federal funds. All public money for what should be public infrastructure'. That both were created and made possible using public funds and serve a critical public need should be end of the debate. They are public utilities - regardless of who owns them.
Public infrastructure is the fiber optic cables not the companies which use it. Imagine a water company that uses public utility water from the city and has a patented process they do to the water. No reasonable person would argue that the use of the city water means the processed water should be public utility by extension. It is the same with the internet (at least it used to be before net neutrality was significantly gutted) just because a company sends data through public infrastructure it does not mean that the company should be considered a utility.
If you can create the currency why tax the public who can barely afford rent?
Retard comment 🤣 Whether or not something was or wasn't funded by stolen taxpayer money has fuck all to do with legitimising it. You aren't owed anything that someone else has to provide.
I would like to drink a cup of tea or a glass of wine with this two gigants.
Love your work Alex!
Gay
@@liberalbias4462 Can't see it, mate.
@@liberalbias4462"I wanna be the meat in an Alex/Destiny sandwich" or "these two guys could DP me any time" would be gay. Also this entire response, I'm pretty gay. 🎉🎉🎉
This was a fantastic watch. Thank you for the video :)
Active counter on how many times Destiny made me check if I was in 1.25x speed: 3
The printing press was a new form of media that had drastic changes on the world. It made the protestant reformation possible, and there was a big war in Europe over that. The world has growing pains with each new media. I trust that eventually we'll work our way through this new change as well.
Watching this was like watching a video on x1.25 any time Destiny talked, and switching back to normal speed every time Alex talks.
Your Peterson impression near the end was hilarious. I don't know if you were doing the hand gestures intentionally 😂
Early and it’s two of my favorite content creators, big W.
Enjoyed this chat…thank you.
The voting problem is one of emergence, not a paradox
people don't seem to be able to grasp the concept of emergence on basically every level
Its neither voting is just logical lets say there's a 1/100,000,000 chance that your vote was the deciding one then if yours wins you get 4 years where 300,000,000 people are ruled by better laws for 4 years this seems like a pretty good deal to me
@@connorvic3 First of all, if you are talking about the United States, then unless you live in a swing state, the odds that your vote will decide the election are more like 1 in 100 trillion. Second of all, even if you do live in a swing state, the odds that the election will turn on one vote is still far less than 1 in 100 million. Third, this calculus only makes sense for a utilitarian. Fourth, you need to take account how much better the laws would be. If they marginally improve the lives of a handful of people, obviously it's illogical to go out and vote on the 1 in less than 100 million chance it will make a difference. Fifth, you need to take into account uncertainty. How certain are you that this election will actually make the difference you think it will make?
Depending on where you are, there's not even any chance at all. Not 1 in X. Literally 0.
We could have every vote be worth an equal amount (1 in 100 million) by doing sortition (1 random persons vote is selected).
But you're wrong about the swing state part. Mathematically, if the election is close (it is in 2016, 2020, 2024) there must be a state where a voter has more than a 1 in 100 million chance of swinging the election
Alex, consider adding an introduction to your podcasts. It’s a bit jarring to jump right into a lengthy discussion and it would be nice to hear some background info on each guest.
Yeah I had to google who that guy is on Wikipedia first.
Do your own research, stop being lazy.
Australian here. I support compulsory voting, even if you spoil the ballot. Why? Because:
1. Voting no longer becomes a question of which party can game the system through “get out the vote” efforts.
2. I think - even with the tiny amount of donkey votes - it creates a situation where the level of political awareness across society is higher. This tends to help us avoid political extremism.
Unrelated, but here in Australia we make it easy to vote. Election day is on the weekend, polling sites are extremely plentiful, and there are mail in options. Employers are required to allow you to vote - on election day this is your priority.
You guys really are 2 of my favourite voices. I'm so glad that you guys get on. Add sam harris and Peter Bergosian and i am in heaven.
As an Australian I much prefer our system. Fully preferential voting, so the winner will get at least 50% of the vote, meaning that the majority of people have chosen them. Compulsory voting is based on a different view of voting, and civil liberty. Voting isn't a right, its your duty. Hence its compulsory. You don't have to cast a valid vote though.
But I think making it compulsory also means that people end up more interested, and more knowledgable, because they have to vote, it makes the normally disinterested person feel like they ought to learn and know how to vote in a way thats best for them.
You need to look into why voting was made compulsory in Australia. It has nothing to do with it being a "civil duty".
If you talk to the average Australian about politics, they have next to no idea unless they've read a headline or watch the 6pm news. I bet you would struggle to find Australians that could name the 3 branches of government. The same with thinking they have a right to freedom of speech.
@@quartermainegames its exactly why now., thats why we've kept compulsory voting, because it a duty. Which ironically destiny argues further on in this video anyway, wanting to make people vote lol.
That might be true of the baby boomer or older generation, or the older gen x's. But its not true of people born post 1975. First of all newspaper readership is at all time low and declining, same with television viewing, hell Channel 10 is switching off their mildura transmission.
People are far more proactively interested in politics in Australia than you seem to think. You also put a lot of stock of knowing the three branches of government which isn't really required for understanding current politics and people's interests. All of that notwithstanding that that has been taught as part of the school curriculum for the last 4 decades at least, SOSE is taught around the country and covers that. Not that knowing Executive, Legislative and Judicial or Federal, State and Local.
The majority of particularly young people are very proactive about politics.
And yes there is no codified right to free speech within a bill of rights, there is still an inherent right to free speech, expression, protest and religion as part of other laws and acts, human rights etc. You're acting as if we have no free speech at all, and if that were the case Australia would be a very very different country. But its not, we live in a free society.
@@PBMS123 I'm sorry, but "we live in a free society." Really? After what happened during the lockdowns, you're really going to say that!? We absolutely do need a codified bill of rights, to say otherwise is ignorant or trolling.
I'm not going to address anything else you've said, because I'm concerned you're trolling. But if you think we live in a "free" society, maybe you need to look at some of the insane laws that have been passed in the last few years, then get back to me and say Australians actually care about politics.
@@quartermainegames oh please.... get fucked. This is such a bad faith argument that just dismisses a deadly pandemic as nothing while you claim that we're not free. Please, pull the other one. Its called a social contract.... Did you even watch this video? We don't and can't live in a purely libertarian utopia, because that doesn't exist, it can't exist. We had a duty to protect people, and being the first actual global pandemic in 100 years, sure there were teething pains, but lockdowns verifiably, statistically saved lives. Sometimes we as a society have to make temporary sacrifices for the greater good.
"After what happened during the lockdowns". You can today still protest, we still have free and fair elections, you can criticise all the politicians who enacted lockdowns without fear of becoming a political prisoner. You're acting like everything is so bad when you can't be bothered to go and look at what a non free country looks like. It was a public health emergency. People were dying. I'm concerned you're trolling, hard, because you're that goddamn blind to what an actually unfree society looks like, and the horror that people that live in those societies face everyday. The fact you think the lockdowns in the face of a pandemic somehow change that, despite basically every other developed nation on earth enacting similar policies, is bonkers, and could only come from trolling, or sheer unbridled ignorance.
I never said we didn't "need" a bill of rights at all, please show me where I said that. I said that just because we don't doesn't mean freedom of speech isn't well accepted in the country as an inherent right.
Our country isn't perfect, but it sure beats living in China, or Afghanistan, or insert any other actually subjugated country on earth. Laws are passed by the legistlature, not people, we don't live in a direct democracy where we are asked to make a decision about everything, which from your statements I would think you would want if you think people don't care.
People do care about politics, thats why the libs lost so poorly the last election, and why the major parties lost so many seats to independents.
You want to use some bs scare and shock jock crap about the lockdowns and because that doesn't agree with you, you think I'm trolling, to say you wont address anything I've said because you likely don't have an answer? Get over yourself, you look a gift horse in the mouth, and throw the baby out with the bath water, over a once in a century event that governments all over the world had to do as well. Could things have been done better, sure, but I never said they were perfect, you seem to lobbing a bunch of unheard bullshit onto me, because you have such a terrible and dichotic view of politics or your own view, a.k.a. "My opinion is the correct one, everyone else is just trolling". GF'd mate, get over yourself. You're response to me was just "errrhhmmerrhhgerrd lockdowns." things could have been done better, but it wouldn't have changed the need for lockdowns. People e.g. you; need to realise they live within a society with many other people. Dealing with a pandemic is not the same or as straight forward as building roads my god. This reeks of someone with more interest and care for themselves the rest of his common man and common society as a whole, and reeks of the "I've got mine, fuck you" attitude that permeates so much of America, and every person who claims to be a libertarian.
Maybe watch the video and learn a thing or 2.
You are not being oppressed here. Not even close. Maybe when you die when you're over 90 years old because of good healthcare and the scientific method, and if you still have a you centric view of the world and rights, if heaven does exist, maybe go complain to the thousands of people who died at the hands of actually oppressive societies and governments, go complain to the victims of tiananmen square about how bad you had it when you had to go in lockdown, not actual lockdown, but where you could still go out and exercise, get food etc. you just couldn't hang around in large groups for no reason in an attempt to try to save the lives of others.
Even if I don't agree with all of your perspectives, I have to say that you do a wonderful job showing potential biases and presuppositions. Just wanted to mention it considering these conversations are helping me to think about my own standings and how I can better fight against self-inflicted inconsistencies and biases in my own logic.
Isn't the chance of corruption necessarily greater the larger the organization? Large organizations lose a ton of resources with checks and balances to combat this
Whenever Destiny speaks I have to check if I accidentally turned on double speed lmao
Great discussion, really enjoyed it and really enjoyed you touching on and analyzing other debates you were both involved in.
I know its not about this video but its the most recent one so maybe i have a chance you read this comment. I would love to see a debate between you and Sabine Hossenfelder about the fine tuning argument and many other things. You are both my favorite youtubers so it would be amazing❤
Been waiting for this one.
Destiny and O’Connor killing it with their conversations. I love both of them.
Great discussion, I really enjoy you two talking! Looking forward to more of those!
Whoa Destiny is really good at answering on the spot with challenging questions. Like Alex's talkin points are mainly recycled from previous videos (Just stop oil) ... but I imagine destiny is talkin about this kinda stuff for the 1st time? Not that I always agree with him, but it's refreshin to see people come up with new points on the spot. Maybe I'm just so used to the religion vids where we've already heard everything since they've been around since like 2008.
i feel like destiny brings out alex's playful and fun side and i love that
great talk
wonderful episode!
Reliability is a virtue. In that sense saying "I appreciate that my opponent stands up for their beliefs" could be taken as asserting that the opponent obtains that virtue, the virtue of reliability.
Until someone is reliably something we don't want them to be.
@dannyvoid better to reliably be something we don't like. As opposed to be unreliable.
I know what to do with reliably horrible people. Unreliable people fool others more easily
@@Mr.Braggadociowhat if someone goes against their principles (that you don’t like) to do things that you do like. They’re continuously going against their principles but you’d prefer that to them sticking to the undesirable ones.
@finnmacmanus5723 if they reliably go against their bad principles to do things I think is good that's is just being reliable. I am happy with that.
@@Mr.Braggadocio what if it’s not reliable, they are occasionally breaking bad principles to do good things, would you say they’d be more virtuous if they just stuck to their principles?
Not exaggerating or trying to glaze, these are the two people on the internet who I respect the thought processes of most, and glean most from their normal talking. Alex in his honest attempts to underand, and Destiny in his thouroughness.
Anyway, I haven't seen him do it, but I actually would expect Jordan Peterson to have a bit of a long answer to "what is a woman", though maybe not quite endless.
He does sometimes have answers that give "I've thought about this a lot and come up with a detailed answer I find pretty good". Especially with all his Jungian and evo psyche stuff, I could definitely see him coming up with something.
I think it was a brilliant insight Alex said about Jordan, in that he's probably mostly talked to people who respect him and just silently try to follow what he's saying, and people that just call him evil and dumb.
I've always thought when he gives round about answers, he was trying to not let the convo lead somewhere he thought is inappropriate to the subject or something.
But it totally makes sense that he would only get validation from people who see any value in him and that would spur him on. We're all socially conditioned, me commenting this and you reading this.
It was a great idea for Alex to try that middle position.
Thank you for this conversation. Made me think and helped me improve my opinions on the topics discussed
You can always tell who the destiny fans are in comments by how much they make fun of a proud black woman
Bizarre to see this guy appear somewhat reasonable in this interview, and then read the utter psychopathic statements he makes on Twitter...
He has always been extreme. He only controls himself when he is interviewed or dealing with important people. Jordan Peterson debate: stayed cool on stage, afterwards on his own channel started bashing JP like crazy. People who only see him on other channels have better view of him than they would otherwise.
@@user-pi4qo3zc2e Sounds like a massive coward. Unsurprising.
@@Novarcharesk mhh i dont think so realy. its more opportunism. its seems he has little problem being very direct and confrontational with people if he sees fit.
@@mattis1389 Yeah, like a coward picks and chooses when to show themselves honestly, or put a mask on.
@user-pi4qo3zc2e You have clearly never watched any of the thousands of hours of hos own content that's available on his channel or you would make such a silly statement as this.
First video of Alex ive seen since he was just starting uni? Glad to see hes still doing things. Even if its interviewing the embodiment of twitter.
It's so nice to see destiny talk to someone who isn't a complete moron
To be honest I was kind of sad the new episode was with Destiny again.
@@keziahradley5897Alex is in US and Destiny is a big figure in online politics so it is only natural. Yoi can always skip this one.
@@sathrielsatanson666 surely I can skip it, I just meant I would have preferred an interview with an intellectual.
@@keziahradley5897 LOL
For me, it's so sad to see Alex talk to someone who is a complete moron
Alex seems a lot more relaxed here.
Great conversations - been a fan of both for years - glad to see the cross over. I wish alex played or at least talked about video games
1:42:10 Nice attempt to slip in a Ground News add there Alex. It would've been perfect.
34:55 Alex caught that too
Jerk off hand at philosophy while speaking to one of our modern philosophers.
He makes it easy to dislike him.
Alex is calm, collected and introspective and really gives space to discuss. I reckon he is someone you'd want around when you're problem solving and want to find a balanced and fair, moral solution ✌
2:11:50 I absolutely love Alex‘ analogy here. I never thought Peterson was trying to obfuscate things unnecessarily; quite the opposite. Once you pushed through his initial „resistance“, the conversation led to much more meaningful and deep insights than if he just answered „Yes, I do think it happened historically“.
I found it to be a bad defense. No respectable quantum physicist would have difficulty explaining an interaction to a child. They can provide a framework that is as understandable as 'balls bouncing' while pointing out exactly that there are complications like 'the ball doesn't quite touch'. Every single physics textbook in the history of the world provided 'approximate a cow as a sphere' without obfuscating that the cow is not actually a sphere. Whether Peterson was trying to obfuscate, I don't take a position on, I just think Alex's defense analogy was pretty silly. In fact physicists would agree on the majority that reductive models are helpful rather than harmful for explaining complex phenomena.
Regardless of the analogy i think Alex navigated his JP conversation very well. He didn't see him coming in with bad faith. Got him to explain why he doesn't answer straight and then proceeded to answer it according to his own epistemology and in a straight forward manner.
@@michaelc.5327 But Jordan Peterson wasn‘t speaking to a child. He was engaged in an intellectual conversation; why would he reduce his position to a simple version thereof?
@@SergiusGBE One can have the perspective or knowlege of a child without being a child in specific niche areas. for instance I could ask you what the Holy Roman Empire is. Let's also say you don't know but you want or need to learn.
Now i could instantly go into detail about its formation, Charlemaigne, the relationship with the papacy and so on, but if you didn't know about charlemaigne, the papacy or geopolitics of middle ages europe its probably not going to help you. So instead I could give a very reductionist, but mostly true, statement that it was a loose german coalition from the middle ages to the 19th century where small individual german states within the empire had high degrees of autonomy, but still pledged to help each other in times of war, and had to pledge allegiance to an emperor.
You now have a very rough idea of what it is, and a foundation for further learning should the want or need arise. This is essentially the same as the analogy in physics for children, but of course applied to a different scenario, which most adults wouldn't know about.
Holy shit that was one of the best Destiny interviews on UA-cam
The south park episode douche vs turd outlined the bully friends to go and vote when as soon as stan (I think) decides he is gonna vote for cartmans choice and not kyles, then kyle is upset and doesn't want him to vote.
2:04:51 Alex even did the facial expressions and hand movements. I'm dying.
i choose to believe you chose this angle purposefully
Of course you do
It is a funny angle
he looks so funny his arms are so short 😂
Enriching conversation! I will hold only one principle from now on: watching Alex‘ podcast every time it comes out, even if it means the world has to end ;)
I really would like to see more monologue videos by Alex.
Personally it was like hearing Alex talk about things and Destiny serving as input.