Peterson Vs Dawkins Debate, What He Missed
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 лют 2025
- I talk about some thoughts I had after watching the Richard Dawkins Vs Jordan Peterson debate. and talk about what i would have thought would be interesting to talk to Dawkins about.
Peterson and Dawkins
• Dawkins vs Peterson: M...
Fridman and Dawkins
• Richard Dawkins: Evolu...
Rogan and Dawkins
• Joe Rogan Experience #...
Peterson had a really interesting idea which I wish Dawkins took seriously. Peterson brought up (and Dawkins agreed with this), that while all facts are equally true not all facts are equally helpful in any event. And so our brain requires a system to weight the usefulness of facts. The system has to be stiff enough to last for 1000s of years but it also has to be dynamic enough to adjust for specific situations, and a narrative structure of religious/spiritual/story is the only conceptual device that can weight facts reliably. Dawkins basically ignored that because he was to caught up with the dragons thing.
"a narrative structure of religious/spiritual/story is the only conceptual device that can weight facts reliably" what!?
@@Ashalmawia Complex problem solving requires an understanding from a big picture, abstract level (top down), to the concrete level of facts (bottom up). Bassically, narrative structures are the most efficient way to store and parse through information. If facts are like pieces of data, then a narrative story is like a data tree that allows you to navigate more efficiently between ideas from the abstract level to the concrete level.
@@jeremiahnoar7504 don't think I agree the way you're describing it. you don't need a narrative (fiction) to weigh facts; the facts that are important are the facts that are relevant to the here-and-now and that affect you in a practical sense. like "what is the temperature outside right now", and "how much gas is in my car", etc. otherwise I need more examples.
@@Ashalmawia It really depends on how complex the question is. If you're asking, a simple question like "what is the temperature here and now" That's easy. But if the question is "what will the weather be like 50 years from now" or "what form of government will best suit our grandkids a few generations from now" or "What books being written today will still be considered a classic 400 years from now" The here and now becomes completely irrelevant. The simple facts most relevant today won't be relevant tomorrow.
@@jeremiahnoar7504 hmm, those are all talking about the relatively distant future for some reason. those are not really "facts", because the future is not set. facts are about the present, not the future. even information about the past might not be "facts" because it's guesswork not immediately demonstrable. even what happened yesterday is starting to lose "fact" status because the reliability of the information is starting to decay.
It was a boring debate because Dawkins is a boring person who dismisses anything he doesn't believe and hasn't come up with a new idea for anything. He has no imagination or desire to explore anything foreign to him. Peterson is a great deep thinker who clearly thinks a lot more about life than Dawkins does. It doesn't matter if you believe in god, the ability and desire to explore ideas and discuss different theories is what matters and that enhances knowledge and understanding. Dawkins and all of the atheist figures are downright boring and dismissive and also quite rude and immature some times.
You know putting on a tweed jacket, filming yourself in front of a book shelf, smoking a pipe and talking with that forced and silly inflection doesnt make what you are saying sound any smarter right.
Maybe instead of spending so much effort on the contrivance you should spend it on developing your ability to think and speak. It would be a lot less pretentious.
Go away Karen!
That made me a bit sleepy. I think you have a calming voice.
@ That's not my name Judy.
@ I do. That was more insightful than anything this video or the person hosting it has probably ever said and it was sarcastic and accidentally accurate.
Absolutely right. Authenticity shines on UA-cam and this guy has none
dude is this a parody of a pretentious intellectual or are you being serious?