Deeper Yet Into The Weeds | Pageau & Vervaeke | EP 277
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 вер 2024
- This was the first time that Jonathan Pageau, John Vervaeke, and Jordan Peterson all sat down together in person. Recorded in Dr. Peterson’s home, and prominently featuring many of Kwakwakaʼwakw carver Charles Joseph’s incredible statues and carvings, this recording may require a few complete watch-throughs. The conversation was created to intentionally dive deep into the areas of systems of perception and their impacts on our abilities to prioritize, the nature of YHWH (Judeo-Christian God), and the exploration of the True, the Good, and the Beautiful. This conversation is only the beginning of many more conversations to have between these three and on these topics. Please comment any insights that you have derived from this video, my team will be paying close attention to the progress on these ideas.
Jonathan Pageau is a symbolic thinker, UA-camr, and class carver of orthodox icons. Jordan and Jonathan have an ongoing dialogue surrounding Judeo-Christian narrative, reality, and symbolism among many other topics.
John Vervaeke is an Associate Professor in Cognitive Psychology and Cognitive Science at the University of Toronto. His work constructs a bridge between science and spirituality in order to understand the experience of meaningfulness and the cultivation of wisdom so as to afford awakening from the meaning crisis.
If you want to hear the rest of my conversation, please go to www.dailywire.... and become a member today. Thanks.
This video is sponsored by Elysium Health. Visit: explorematter.c...
Check out Jonathan Pageau’s UA-cam channel: / @jonathanpageau
thesymbolicwor...
(speaking)
pageaucarvings...
(carving)
orthodoxartsjo...
(writing)
Watch more from John Vervaeke: / johnvervaeke
-Links-
// WATCH MORE //
Dr. Peterson's extensive catalog is available now on DailyWire+: utm.io/ueJdK
// SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL //
Newsletter: mailchi.mp/jor...
Donations: jordanbpeterso...
// COURSES //
Discovering Personality: jordanbpeterso...
Self Authoring Suite: selfauthoring.com
Understand Myself (personality test): understandmyse...
// BOOKS //
Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life: jordanbpeterso...
12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos: jordanbpeterso...
Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief: jordanbpeterso...
// LINKS //
Website: jordanbpeterso...
Events: jordanbpeterso...
Blog: jordanbpeterso...
Podcast: jordanbpeterso...
// SOCIAL //
Twitter: / jordanbpeterson
Instagram: / jordan.b.peterson
Facebook: / drjordanpeterson
Telegram: t.me/DrJordanP...
All socials: linktr.ee/drjo...
#JordanPeterson #JordanBPeterson #DrJordanPeterson #DrJordanBPeterson #DailyWirePlus #politics #news #podcast #culture #Kwakwakaʼwakw #indian #indigenous #statue #CharlesJoseph
4:05 relevance realization is like the collective unconscious element that Jung presented - AI may develop a form of a personal unconscious but doesn't seem to have the capacity to form a collective unconscious. potentially, this may in part make us unique from a hyper-intelligent AI
5:45 prioritizing principle operates unconsciously - implicit/unconscious self-organzing principle
7:30 this is what religion helps with - an integration framework for identity, especially if you believe in its context
9:23 great point about shifting the problem by labeling it “an internal homunculus - dynamic and self-organizing is a great way to move forth with it
10:48 fundamental sense of agency
17:00 prioritization is a multi-dimensional optimal gripping
24:23 nobody willing does evil - they do what they seem to be a good in some fashion (this is similar to what Sam Harris objectifies in religion - the risk of buying into a narrative of evil and using history as evidence. Richard Dawkins sees this in a similar light, expect conceptualized it as - if we were to have this drive toward accepting/having a narrative framework that's susceptible to violence, that would be a short coming of our biology and that's not good.
25:55 evil is not a perversion of the good - but this can be wrapped up in their own narrative; still driven by a coherent spirit. delineating the ethic of evil isn't merely chaotic
35:40 god is what's common in the good, the true, and the beautiful. I wonder if this relates to the framework of perception (such as a religious text) or the state of observance itself. because I remember in on of Dr. Vervaeke's dialogoses, he brought up that god is what allows us to self-actualize in a sense - so the integrative framework but not the meditative sense itself that we're brought into
36:30 "The primacy of beauty, the centrality of goodness, and the ultimacy of truth." isn't this basically what Sir Roger Penrose was alluding to in Dr. Peterson's podcast with him? Penrose said he "considered the platonic truth - truth, beauty and morality." This was timestamp 1:32:30 in "Asking a Theoretical Physicist About the Physics of Consciousness | Roger Penrose & Jordan Peterson"
38:20 realization is always a comparative judgment
39:13 "beauty is when apperances disclose reality" - similar to how a meditative state, such as a prayer, allows a firmer integration into one's identity bc of the sense of the "truth"
39:47 "make your bed" is similar to how Liver King says eating liver is the gateway to the "nine ancestrial tenets" and the lifestyle/integrative placebo of it is what he's ultimately selling
43:49 smooth out beauty in order to perceive reality
45:50 primacy of love and beauty are adjacent to one another. fundamental egocentrism - fundamental way in which you prioritize your perception on the world (can draw similarities to Dr. Anil Seth's work on how our preception/predective-error processing is a sort of sustained hallucination in which the sense of self arises to serve the environment
47:03 can't reason your way out of egocentrism, other than love - love is when you recognize something other than yourself as real
48:00 relationship to your future self is representative of your relationship with others
48:58 like a form of manifestation
52:30 replace the shallow aesthetic as a new representation of beauty
54:10 Dr. Vervaeke's criticism of Dr. Peterson
55:50 it's like the is ought problem
57:50 mapping intelligibility was solved by evolution
58:45 evolution pre-suposes an ontology in which mapping intelligibility works
59:20 notion of ontological/epistimological logos = pre-condition for scientific attidue. so it's embedded in a sense
1:00:05 every attempt to explain intelligibility presuposes it as a fundamental thing - promise is kept = the good
1:01:40 a prior of being - this is where people who believe in panpsychism may come to their conclusions
1:02:20 "i think therefore I am" creates a circular argument bc there's a presupposition of what you're trying to explain
1:03:15 this is similar to how most people refer to that "being" in third person
1:07:30 instinct of awe in animals
1:10:45 it's the same thing with how prayer allows you to easier "connect with god"
1:16:30 musical intelligibility
1:21:22 "a problem that appears anywhere anyways" like the title everything everywhere all at once haha. that point about the father, son, and holy spirit representing this multiplicity is interesting
1:27:55 meta narrative
1:29:50 naming things is different from telling the story
1:32:05 point where Dr. Vervaeke disagrees with Pageau/Dr. Peterson
1:33:20 narrative, nomalogical, and self-traanscending dimension are irreducible to eachother
1:33:40 ontology isn't captured inside epistemology because epistemology can not reach to the full extent of the multiplicity of ontology. Dr. Peterson summarizes Dr. Vervaeke's argument: no matter what the story is, there's something that's real that's beyond that story
1:35:20 that which transcends the current narrative - point of agreement
1:37:25 solution to the meaning crisis doesn't need narrative - this is similar to what Sam Harris would agree with and RIchard Dawkin would see this, if fundamental, as a shortcoming of our biology - "why must we conceptualize xyz in narrative form..."
1:40:00 the idea of music is a narrative is a difficult conceptualization that may lead astray. so the narrative is a result of your perception and not its implicitness in the object - it's object of meaning without you assigning one to it
1:42:16 Jung , science, and alchemy
1:43:16 you're categorizing context relative to what you're aiming at
1:44:15 the point of disagreement is that everything is reducible to the "narrative ethic" in relation to identity
1:45:49 narrative isn't about causal laws, it's about an irrefutable cuasal pathway
1:47:13 throughline of all the aspects isn't an aspect, the throughline of all the stories isn't a story - point of contention
1:49:49 must simalteanouesly move up the abstraction level in a narrative sense as you abstract from scientific truths to the universal truth - otherwise we'd misuse the nomological (seen in identity politics)
Thank you so much, Dr. Peterson, for pinning my comment! I greatly appreciate your work as well as the work of Dr. Vervaeke and Jonathan Pageau! I am very glad to see you're getting better, it's for sure evident throughout the progression of your podcasts in the last couple of years! Also, I am very much looking forward to your new book coming out next Spring and the tour you're going on with Ben Shapiro interviewing people across Europe about communism.
For anyone reading, please excuse the grammar in the comment above - I was going to edit it up and make it more concise after listening to the entire conversation. I wish everyone a great day and if you're interested, I have a 30-second short on my channel titled "Why Jordan Peterson is Famous."
Here are some timestamps for the rest of the conversation:
1:51:39 ontological realm outside of narrative has a logos - is the ontological logos somehow a narrative? Christianity claims the logos is a person (interesting because this suggests the person is the narrative frame in part because they are the agent in the problem of perception).
1:53:30 goal of meaning crisis
1:56:00 what is god?
2:01:51 great point! There’s a nomological unity - universal process that explains adaptivity (evolution)
2:04:45 Dr. Peterson and Dr. Vervaeke ultimately disagree about whether logos ultimately operates as a narrative
2:09:02 perfectly fine objection. And like Pageau clarifies, if we embrace narrative then the solution to the meaning crisis won’t be universal enough. This is interesting because people like Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, and Lawrence Krauss have essentially the same contingency for disagreement; it’s not necessarily that they don’t believe in this conceptualization of “truth,” but they’re weary of the dogmatic implication of narrative.
2:11:40 essence of post-modern conundrum
2:13:35 dynamic of narrative, nomological, and logos + basis of the meaning crisis
2:15:55 deriving everything to the narrative puts us in the post-modernist trap because you can dispense with the corrective reality because there’s no limiting principal to conceptualize one’s subjective experience
2:17:00 Neoplatonism
2:18:30 intelligibility is the way reality is realizing itself, relevance realization is intelligence, and the good is the trust that the intelligence can track the intelligibility
2:22:00 Neoplatonism as a way to find the throughline between religions. Science is a form of this by making implicit within itself hidden Neoplatonic moves
Thanks!
For this, you are amazing. Thank you for summing it all up my friend, that's some holy work right there ❤
@@davidlakhter it is very unlikely, that Your comment will be ever read by him or shown to him. UA-cam is being moderated by his daughter.
The impact of collateralized deceptive ignorance reduces integral progress at best, leading interactions to become of a reactive empirical nature based on overcoming emotionally created fear, as well as self realization of failure, to empower coherent changes. This may result in new perspectivity, having to overcome the traumas of all collateral irrationality first, by practicing patience, as to be able to create access into the state where time has no limits into the now, unlocking the intuitive mind to be able to take over priorities in its best performance first, becoming the focus point of observation of actions.
Pageau quietly thinking: “the answer is Christ, guys.”
Haha yeah it's fun to listen to them, but also slightly irritating because a lot of this has been figured out 1k years ago.
100% funny cuz it's true on so many levels.
@@phoult37 Yeah, but nobody knows this, people nowadays take the story of creation to be something that really happened.
@@phoult37 no.
@@siddharthagarwal5756 Could you expand on this? And the comment you originally replied to? Trying to make sense of all this. Thanks!
Watching this was so weird because I know I wouldn’t have the mental capacity to have this conversation in real life yet I feel like I deeply understand almost everything they’re saying
Yes!!! I couldn’t get that feeling out of my head today. I believe it was Grace. 🕊
Yes! Perhaps you are, as I am, dyslexic. I posit that because I have that thought/experience very very often. I found a way to go to graduate school, though I did Not go to undergraduate school. I knew I would not have been able to keep up with the volume of the reading one must do there. Yet, as Jordan has already pointed out: one’s skill in writing is directly related to how much you’ve read (and the quality of that which has been read.) Here’s a funny piece of that: My comprehension has always been good. !?!?
How does THAT work?
But it’s still caught up with me. It’s too late for me to attend to graduate school. Which is how I met JBP. His online psych lectures.
Jordan loves Beethoven and his elder brother, Bach (etc.) But these conversations very like Jazz. And High Jazz at that.
You just described my life. ;)
The horsemen are back. Someone call Bishop Barron.
Calling them horsemen is so fuckin lame dude. Stop it, find something else
I thought that Exactly! Yes please, this is Fantastic!
Throw in Father Mike Schmitz and I'll rescue my father from the belly of the whale.
😍- I dont often use this emoji, but seeing these 3 together, I cant think of anything else to say
Or how about Nicole Arbour? 😁
This looks like the JBP I liked back in 2016. Exploring, polite, curious. Much better than the culture war stuff.
Fighting for your culture is a never ending battle.
@@cydra_infinity1423 Well, yeah, but are you sure he’s your fighter? Love the man but he’s dualistic and draws from Daoism and a lot of non-western sources
The point of Peterson is that his enemies in the culture war all attempt to sabotage everything what these three are talking about. There is a reason why Commies kill artists. So yeah, I would say it’s all relevant.
@@jonaswiskari9382
Your point? Is Daoism mutually exclusive with fighting?
@@elel2608 What defines “your culture” was my point.
These 3 men together is just awesome . I love every conversation they have.
I propose this convo needs Paul Vanderklay.
We need to ground these discussions into the solid earth of how to live; as in, to continually make sure it’s applicable to the lives we live.
@@elektrotehnik94 I think you mean Art Vandelay, importer/exporter of latex goods
Great stuff.
More, please
Even though I'm intrigued by Petersons comments upon the culture wars, this is where he captures me far beyond mere intrigue. This is a trio that I could spend my every waking hour listening to.
Agreed
Me too 🙂
There is no culture war, just some idiots that were given a voice. Truth prevails
Took every course Prof. Vervaeke taught when I did my psych undergrad at UofT, that man can make a 3 hour lecture fly by!
lol
So envious of the calibre of education up in U of T and your own zeal and enjoyment of quality professors whose skillful elocutions of difficult material keep the masses engaged. Bravo.👏🏽
Lucky Sean! I had a horrible experience at a private university that completely soured me on psychology as a science. Mind you, it was 26 years ago, and it was as communist as much as it was classically liberal. These men show me that it can be both scientific and philosophical at the same time without indoctrination. God bless!
Lucky
I don't always agree with his insights but his speed at adapting to information given him on such complex subjects is astonishing. It would be fantastic to be challenged by him in a classroom setting.
Jordan’s last conversation with Verveake was far and away one of the most insightful and cognitively stimulating conversations I’ve ever had the pleasure of listening to. I don’t think I have ever been so excited to see a returning guest on this channel as I am for Verveake and Pageau!
I completely agree 👍 by far his best and most open minded guest. Unlike fry and Harris
@@SP-mf9sh I love Harris and historically have been staunchly on his side of the debate, but I get so much more from Peterson's discussions with Verveake. Listening to them talk is always fascinating and challenging. I can't get enough of it.
@@SP-mf9sh i don't think Harris and Fry are close-minded, it's just that they get close to the problem (let's say "is from ought" in case of Harris) and hold too tight to their proposed solutions which doesn't let them space to see the full complexity or different approaches and sometimes focus way too much on a single cause they identify. I think it's a problem of time management too because these problems are deeply philosophical and require A LOT of time to think about.
But yeah, in general people that take philosophy seriously are the most open-minded persons in the society and Varvaeke is a good example. His work is fascinating, meticulous and brilliant.
Where can I find the last conversation to which you refer?
@@nancybartley4610 It is an older Peterson podcast titled “ A conversation so intense it might as well be psychedelic“.
This is my Super Bowl! Absolutely stoked for this conversation!
No kidding! Just seen this rec before going to bed. I'm going to watch it like a film tomorrow night 😄
I highly recommend everyone to delve into John Vervaeke’s work on yt his awakening from the meaning crisis series specifically is remarkable and I enjoy his voices with vervaeke conversations. He is a real philosophical and intellectual giant of our time together with these other two Canadian intellectuals such a wonderful conversation I appreciate all of you. ❤️🍄
I went through the entire series and took notes on each episode after John and Jordan’s first conversation I saw. I was pissed because I couldn’t understand them lol…. I still only barely understand them >.< I am not a smart man
@@joshuaprivett3552 its not an easy thing to take into the brain and crunch lol i had to take whole days to ponder a few of the episodes and it helped that i was semi sorta studied through stoicism and other theologys prior to delving into JV’s work on the meaning crisis so most of it sorta fit into place with what I already understood but he breaks it all down completely so eloquently and quite possibly send someone to a mental hospital if they aren’t able to hold there mind together afterwards lol but i say it’s totally worth the vast amount of knowledge and wisdom and insights he offers in the series. Now i just promote his work doing my small part in possibly changing the world ❤️🍄
What a powerhouse, gentlemen!!! I am impressed with your having been able to get together and gift us with your enlightening conversation.
I propose this convo needs Paul VanderKlay.
Why PVK? We need to ground these discussions into the solid earth of how to live; as in, to continually make sure it’s applicable to the lives we live.
This, was an impressive Canadian deep diving
by intellectual brilliance, combined with body and soul. An almost feverish journey through the labyrinth of proposals, rejections and modifications.
Long time ago, since I had the pleasure witnessing a discussion that deep, respectful and productive. One question remains though? Why Canada is inhabiting such wise human beings, but in contrast to them, such a mediocre person at the top;) ?? Too bad, wisdom is not an infection;)
💯
@@j.h252 wow that's quite the description. Its like I'm taking some intense psychedelics!
I had Vervaeke as a cognitive science professor, and I was shocked to see the students collaborate and help each other learn more than any other class I took at UofT, where you always expect to see students shut off and anti-social outside of their little circles. It speaks highly of his character that he got students in the most anti-social university in the world to be engaged and giving.
I understood about 5 percent of that conversation, but man was that entertaining and thought provoking.
Haha, yeah man it's a weird feeling. I'm over here thinking "I must be understanding this" bc I find all of it to be so very interesting. But simultaneously I'm still lost enough to not be able to translate the ideas into my own words. Normally I watch videos at 1.5x and 2x speed but this video feels so dense to me that midway I finally got sick of "rewinding" that I finally adjusted it down to 0.75x speed so I could invest more effort into visualizing and familiarizing myself with the words so that I don't miss out on any of the complicated parts more than necessary.
Hmmm. I'm at 3 percent.. you win! Arguably 3 maybe even too high 😆
Same here... it is the kind of conversation that need to be listen at least 5 times.. hahaha.. like the psychological meaning of the biblical stories..
Its not your fault. The 5 percent was jordan peterson trying to rope these two babbling fools in.
I've learned looooooads of new words watching jordan
absolute banger, well done. Can't wait to hear the 5 part breakdown from PVK.
No one translates Vervaeke like PVK 😄
I can't wait for this from Paul Vanderklay!
Yeah, man. You got it. This the one👀
Thank you for not dumbing down the conversation to appeal to larger audiences. It seems like this is what people want now, real conversations. This inspires me to read more books.
Honestly, I doubt they would have enjoyed a watered-down conversation enough to engage in it
@@ZM-dm3jg I have considered doing the same. Did you read them in German, or English?
Harder to grasp (at least for me), but waaay deeper and more impactful.
"The fire in hell is the love of God." That sent chills down my body.
Is maybe the only way to make sense of God and the reality of hell.
Forgot about that statement. That was epic, yes
Read St Isaac the Syrian, he goes into this in depth. Essentially there is no hell, hell is a mode of being where you reject God so his love is a metaphorical fire to you when the veil is finally removed entirely.
I don't think it's a complete statement to call the fire the love of God, the fire is in fact the wrath of God. Now you could say it's God's love in action, manifesting itself in wrath against sin, then that would be correct.
@@solaveritas2 Hard to say because these guys are very careful with their words and i assume he meant exactly what he said. It makes more sense to me though that the fire in hell would be the absence of God's love. 🤔
I’ve been waiting MONTHS for this; you three together make some of the most compelling and gripping intellectual discussion on the internet. The mix of religious thought, philosophy, psychology, and cognitive science (and a sprinkle of metaphysics) makes for one hell of a two and a half hours. More please.
I propose this convo needs Paul VanderKlay.
Why PVK? We need to ground these discussions into the solid earth of how to live; as in, to continually make sure it’s applicable to the lives we live.
@Jack Sprat you need to think more.
@Jack Sprat you need to think more.
@Jack Sprat I also used to attempt to smear this man and make petty attempts to discredit him in any way I could because I thought he had a harmful message that is dangerous to society. Then I realized that I could just listen and evaluate every claim in real time with my own critical thinking or just suspend judgement when an idea is too novel or over my head. Somehow I am still ok and my world didn't collapse.
It turns out things don't have to be so black and white. You don't have to be a JBP cultist or a hater. You can just listen to interesting and uninteresting ideas as you see fit without reflexively and thoughtlessly accepting or rejecting them outright. You should try it sometime. Feels good man.
@Jack Sprat He is not my Doctor. I will never go to him for pharmaceutical advice. I am only watching videos and like I already said I get to decide what I take from it.
this is the thing. The previous (IDW) era was dominated by the sensibility of debate. Which is fine as far as it goes. But for building the things we need, this kind of dialog is the thing.
Thank you for your recent dialog with John and Johnathan on Egregores/Hyper-agents. I thought that was a very 'building' conversation and I found it wonderfully and profoundly enlightening.
Glad to see more of these types of videos, rather than the culture war ones!
AMEN
The Culture war is spiritual !
Yes, the culture war can only be won, by disengaging from it.
As a catechumen of Roman Catholicism (making my Confirmation and Holy Communion this month), these 3 men are by and large the foundational sources for the deep inspiration, investigating, and inquiry going in to adopting this faith (despite the fact that none of them are Catholic - Jonathan is close ;) ). I sincerely thank all 3 of you, along with Bishop Barron, as the most influential people in my life that I have never met. I find myself coming to tears of joy and awe when listening to these conversations. The gratitude cannot be expressed enough. God bless.
I agree, Bishop Barron needed here!
@@marystenson2852 this is great just the three of them. Maybe they'll do a Four Horseman of Meaning part 2!
Just finished the video- you gentlemen are taking it all to new levels. Absolutely amazing.
@Frankie Hawkins congratulations to you, as well! It's a beautiful thing.
Does the fact that there is no evidence for God pose an obstacle to your belief? Or do you have some kind of personal experience that keeps you going? And is that personal experience strong enough that you can't dismiss it as just something created by your mind? Thank you
I couldn't be happier that there will be more of these!
The last conversation between Jordan and John was amazing. It’s titled “a conversation so intense it might as well be psychedelic” definitely recommend watching. Excited for this.
Sitting on my bed eating pizza watching these incredible minds unlock reality. I am a very blessed man!
Me too ! Literally
Men of culture
Solipsism is solved by love... So profound! I'm going to have to watch this 3 more times
I love listening to intelligent people...just wished I understood more than 33 1/3% of it lol
Vervaeke has a detailed class about the meaning crisis on his channel, and Peterson has his Maps of Meaning course here on youtube too. They both walk through arguments step by step.
You asked for comments, so I'll try to say something brief and helpful. This conversation is excellent. I am especially pleased with the discussion of the primacy of Beauty, which is covered in similar fashion by Dr. Tim Patitsas in his collected interviews _The Ethics of Beauty_ . He contrasts the "beauty first" approach to theology (and the treatment of PTSD) with the "truth first" tendency of post-enlightenment western cultures, while recognizing (as you all do) that the three transcendentals ultimately indwell each other. He also recovers the word Eros as a love for the beautiful (as Vervaeke noted that Plato used), suggesting that it is a better word than Agape in the context of being drawn forth toward Theophany (Beauty qua the manifestation of the Divine).
I also regard _After Virtue_ by Alasdair MacIntyre as the preeminent philosophical work on teleology, narrative, and virtue-I imagine these great minds are familiar with it, but I would love to hear them engage with it more directly.
Lastly, from my own rudimentary perspective, I would like to hear more on the connection between the primacy of Beauty and the primacy of Love, esp., perhaps, in the connection to JP's explication of Pinocchio, specifically that Love in some sense desires to "make real" (and autonomous) what is not yet fully realized. Vervaeke referenced one of my favorite Iris Murdoch quotations about Love and Art: *"Art and morals are...one. Their essence is the same. The essence of both of them is love. Love is the perception of individuals. Love is the extremely difficult realisation that something other than oneself is real. Love, and so art and morals, is the discovery of reality."* If Murdoch is right, then human artistic endeavor properly pursued (like Geppetto's) is analogous to the creative act of the Logos (though obviously limited by comparison and dependent upon appeal to the transcendent, e.g. the Blue Fairy). The movement (or Eros) toward Beauty (or Theophany) can subsume (or perhaps baptize?) each individual artistic moment as a fractal of itself (to use Pageau's term). Peterson himself once referred to artwork as a "crystalized act of exploration" with the process embedded within the product. I wonder then, in the case of an infinite process, if the product is never fully realizable, we nevertheless might theoretically approximate (by participation in the process) an ever increasing level of being-like an asymptote to the Divine.
Hope some of that made sense. With Gratitude.
I also read The Ethics of Beauty by Dr. Tim Patitsas and was so excited to see them exploring similar concepts here! I'd love to see any of the 3 read it and hear their thoughts.
Yes it made plenty of sense.
Some smart people all around 😊.
I too have been really curious to know what Dr. Peterson & Dr. Vervaeke make of Macintyre's work. An interview with him would be fascinating.
This is so much more helpful than the politically inspired videos. 2 hours well spent.
What a fine gentlemanly discussion. You have challenged my thinking on several fronts. Thank you kindly.
Imagine they done this every week. Now that would be the number 1 podcast in the world!! Amazing rapport between them all.
So so many words yet still undefinable and thank God because what a beautiful conversation. I hope the youth are tuning in
I'm glad to see John Vervaeke here again. After I've discoverd him based on a previous podcast I started practicing based on his youtube series and within a year I turned from being depressed, mentally burnt out and aimless to being joyful, productive and having a clear aim. Thank you for everything ♥️ Thank you for everything you three do for us ♥️
This is what the universe needs. Thankyou for this!!
W O W! That was the most fascinating conversation I think I’ve ever heard! I really love you guys! Please do it again….I can hardly wait! ❤️❤️❤️
@@ZM-dm3jg exactly this,
also his 1on1 with Vervaeke is also a marvel of knowledge. Although it is done remotely and also be forewarned that Jordan was just cleared from his medical bout and couldn't exert at optimal condition so you will find him unusually and excessively interruptive and disruptive. It's the only downside of it
good thing they are good friends so Vervaeke was probably aware of it and dealt with it very well.
So glad to see these three I think the last time Jordan did something along the lines of this... It was so interesting listening to their ideas and what they’ve found out from studies... Can’t wait to see what this podcast holds.
Definitely the most interesting and profound get-together of three J's i've ever seen!
(Jordan, Jonathan, John)
oh my god let's go! been watcing Dr. Vervaeke's content since the last episode with him and loved the recent video with Pageau - looking forward to this conversation!
Have fun exploring!
Going back to what I said before, but applying it to Music:
1. Music is made up of the elements of notes, chords, tempos, dynamics, etc. - this is the science, the "What"
2. And also tends to have a progression of chords and themes and a larger recognizable pattern (intro, verses/chorus, building to a climax, and then resolution, as an example) - this is the narrative, the "Who When Where How"
3. But music also has a bigger purpose because it has an author who is composing it for a reason - this is the meta-narrative, the "Why"
We need all three elements and they cannot be further reduced.
We can learn a LOT about the Why's by studying parts 1 & 2, but ultimately, if we admire the work, we need to eventually consult the Author. Modern thinking says "it doesn't really matter what the Author intended because I can deduce my own meanings and enjoy how it makes ME feel." But this is an immature and self-centered approach. True admiration for the creation draws us to admire the Creator. All art is an expression of the artist.
So when we see beauty in the world, we should be drawn to deeper questions like: how am I even able to see/hear this? How is my mind able to interpret and admire it? How could we have been so lavished with such infinite and intricate variations of elements and patterns? Why hasn't this all been wrecked by chaos and entropy?
These questions all lead us to conclude (if we're honest) that it isn't all random chance over time, but clearly the result of an intelligent Designer who expressed Himself thru His masterfully complex and cohesive Creation and made us to be able to understand and appreciate it. The Westminster Catechism says we were made to "Glorify God and enjoy Him forever." A God capable and worthy of being glorified and enjoyed is a God we want to glorify and enjoy in intimate relationship.
The closer we get to a Biblical theology, the more we rightly interpret reality. This discussion shows that when we plumb the depths of understanding, we always keep coming back to The Bible.
I appeal to you, @JordanPeterson, PLEASE PLEASE talk to John Piper (another JP!). He is a warrior poet, not unlike yourself, and I believe he is a Wise Guide you MUST CONSULT along your quest to map meaning.
That's it! You are hereby baptized as "the J brothers"! You three are AWESOME together! What a treat and pleasure to watch!🙌🏻💖☺
Turn the j around, and you get a staff
Here, here! We shall now form our hands around the cup!
Three wise men, aiming at the brightest star or something like that. 😃
and jesus was always j. this is not a coincidence. "Synchronicity!" jung shouts.
@@andrewbautista23 It was either that or Tripple J's Hottest 100.
The patience and restraint that John posses is giving me a piloerection. What a conversation! Love the set and setting.
Set and Setting* indeed. This whole series of conversations is hypnotising.
J.P.’s wardrobe is on point, the art by Charles Joseph is stunning, the couch is delicious, the conversation is immersive and there’s 2 1/2 hours of this!?! I am in deep geek. Thank you, god-king and crew.
@@nickstraker5028 If you say so....
@@nickstraker5028 Bahaha, a turgid couch.. now Ive seen everything "Turgid-swollen and distended or congested".. hahahaha
This is where JP is best. Drop the political stuff and go further with these kinds of discussions.
His observation on politics are needed. if not him who? I agree we need more of this.
Exactly what I was thinking. This is way more interesting than when he goes on with angry and bitter rants.
This is the epistomological foundation underlying his urgency and seriousness in the 'political' - which isnt really what that is.
@@marcus8710 correct this is what need to be discussed. Don't think he is correct though
@@marcus8710 In a way, yes but the manner is as important as the content and this kind of discussion is for me so much more valuable than when he rants with and angry and bitter tone about Twitter or Sports illustrated...
10 minutes in and already I have realized this is going to be an amazing discussion, and there is no way they will finish the list.
Easily the deepest episode since this podcast started. It took me three months to go through it thoroughly. I learnt so much, goddamn. And also, John Vervaeke is easily my favorite of JBP's friends ever! He opens his mouth and beauty comes out!
Now, we just need Paul Vanderklay's voice to round it all out.
I am happy to hear his voice in analysis after the fact! Although, his monarchical view, upper register-lower register and his views on people as story or narrative might have brought some new handles to grasp the questions at hand.
I love the three of you, thank you! Please keep meeting like this and sharing with the rest of us. You have no idea how much it means to people like me to be able to listen to your ideas. Thank you, the three of you! Love from Nova Scotia ❤️
1 am, very tired; why do I feel the need to listen to this 2.5 hours conversation? I said to myself, will give it 15mn. Too good! Really. Thank you, to the three of you; and Dr. Peterson you have zero idea of how much you stimulate my intellectual curiosity and development. And I am more in Mathematics and Statistics stuff... but man I just feel a bit more intelligent whenever I listen to you or the guests on your podcasts. Truly.
I could listen to you three gentlemen everyday! Thank you!!!
America is lucky to have Peterson, one of the leading intellectuals from Canada sharing is message to the world.
@@brando3342 doesn’t matter, he’s targeting the US audience as he has US product ads. He’s monetizing in the US.
Wow. That was way too good. I will have to rewatch this many times, I am sure. Vervaeke is a whole different thing to listen to. I would like him to explain "affordance" to me one day. I still don't really know what he means by that word. However, he has forever changed the way I use the word realize. Thanks again gentlemen. You continue to expand my mental horizons.
An affordance "affords" or offers a grip on or action In the world. It's a handle. "Get a grip, man."
Oh wow. I thought he used it to mean something like "making space". More like a handle with which to grip. Very useful. Thank you good sir! That really makes a lot of sense!!!!
Professor looking in a great shape. God bless you professor Peterson.
He does look better eh, and seems somewhat revitalized? I have 'some' sense of the hardship he's faced in the last few years and the toll it took on his body and spirit I would say so it is great to see improvement. Perhaps pursuing something new (this new book) along with having a larger and more robust support system around him has something to do with his renewed vigor? In any case I'm immensely pleased for him and a little relieved if I'm honest.
Good, capable men and women with strong backbones will see us forward
@@IntrinsikNZ Well said.
Man, after years of listening to all three of these gentlemen, I still need a philosophy encyclopedia to follow along. Could someone on Jordan's team consider placing in the description a glossary of terms and names used in the conversation?
There seems to be a halo around John Vervaeke's head, symbolism happens.
Happy to see Jordan take a moment away from the angry culture war warrior and talk about issues that drew people, including myself, to him. I'm a fan of Pagaeu who leans into the Orthodox religious theology, though I have no organized religion affiliation. Vervaeke approaches the 'meaning crisis' like the University professor that he is. Interesting, but dry, for me.
The amount of concepts they've discussed that applies to pure mathematics and theoretical physic is astonishing. I'm not an expert by any means but there's a lot to cover on that for sure. I haven't watched podcasts Dr. Peterson made with mathematicians of physicists wet but they must be also very interesting!
They apply. They're just more vague interpretations of the cognitive interactions with reality rather than formalizing how the universe works (outside of cognition).
Yes it’s very interesting, I’ve found my philosophical conversations with mathematicians, physicists, engineers and and psychologists extremely philosophically rewarding and insightful.
I think perhaps that it's because math is very much abstract logic, and its truths are not physical things but are physically observable, like objects and physics are the incarnations of mathematical truths in a certain way.
I think when you three talk we need to allot Jonathan a certain amount of speaking time 😂 because Jordan and John together, no one is gonna get a word in
Beauty, Truth & Reason ~ on a couch 🍁
How fortunate are we that we get to observe this for free. Thank you very much.
My four favorite people! Err.... Where's Bishop Barron?
Enjoing the conversation! Regarding the term Ethics: There is my Ego, my spirit, my self. so The way I treat myself is an Ethical act bacause I am a comunity 🙂. Not just how we treat others.
Vervaeke should get a reward for patience, Peterson I love ya but you gotta give your guests a chance to finish a thought
Shout out to Jonathan Pageau for being interrupted 500 times and staying humble af 😩
First
This is absolute end game for philosophy currently, introduced me to a lot of names and ideas please more more, the value is infinite
It is really something hilarious to watch Jordan almost writhe in agony as he tries balance being respectful and letting both guests speak unobstructed with also wanting to drop some brilliant, train of consciousness observations every five seconds 😄 Almost convo, we need more pronto
I'd say he loves the sound of his own voice so much it's more on the pathetic side. Jordan does interrupt a lot and takes a lot of space in the conversation. I wish he'd let other parties speak more.
Fr: That’s passion…goal is to find something that makes one react like that
You can tell he's just really excited about the conversation
As a classically trained musician (piano at 3, orchestra at 9, cello, guitar, composition, and so on and on and on) music is a narrative. It’s the narrative of human’s observations of and interactions with the patterns of nature that call out to us. Thinking of all the classical cello songs there is a universal emotion each song has that everyone worldwide can describe to some accuracy. It’s nature’s patterns that we have started to unravel throughout our lineage.
I heard that according to where you are from sad chords to some cultures can be happy and vice-versa. Do you know anything about that and do you think that may pose a problem in what you are saying if this is true?
Here's a distinction that could possibly help the discussion on Rev. Often in John's writings what is meant by e.g. sin as a verb is a top level characterization:. Was the dominant, regular pattern of conduct one characterized by sin or faithfulness, even if imperfect. The Greek tense makes a difference and rarely makes it into English well. For example, "he who sins is of the devil" doesn't and can't mean he who falls into a single episode of sin. It's he whose trajectory is toward evil and estrangement from communion with God. This can be demonstrated pretty easily by comparing various passages. The idea is you live your whole life and then the judgment based on your deeds but there is also an ability to know your trajectory en route and celebrate having been reconciled (though apostasy is acknowledged). Hence He who has the son has life.
You're welcome to subscribe to my clips channel for additional content: ua-cam.com/users/JordanBPetersonClips
Can I simply thank you for putting the scientific !Argument¡ in the spotlight and almost sarcastically explain that you are doing this in this interview in your intro. Thank you mister Peterson. I would love to argue every persona of you and learn.
Jonathan's ability to wait til the perfect moment to make his point is such a good contrast to Jordan and John's style of conversation. (Also the three Js lol) He brings clarity to the conversation while still making his point, pretty impressive. I feel like Jonathan should be backup or moderator for JBP's debates on a regular basis.
This man saved my life.
OMG.... thank you for stretching my mind to the outer limits of our culture! I can't think of one person I know as an acquaintance,friend, foe, or family that would even think about listening to this great conversation. I've been craving this moment my entire life.
Now I have to return to Plato and read his books. I was not impressed by him years ago. I didn't like his ideas about society and the government. As far as Rome goes... I will always consider them brutes. Maybe earlier in their history they might have been much better. Ancient Egypt lasted thousands of years and was not a warring nation until the Greeks, Phoenicians, and Romans began attacking them. I never believed in Empire Building whether it was England, France, Spain and certainly not Rome, or Greece, or the USA. There have been a lot of huge nations that did not insist in ruling over the entire earth. I just can not bring myself to have respect for Empire Building.... It is not something to be proud of at all.
Great podcast I really enjoyed listening to all the comments and PERCEPTIONS on all that was talked about and done my best to keep up being able to skip back and relisten was very helpful to me looking forward to the next installment it was a real Trinity of knowledge and understanding that for me made it possible to think and feel engaged enough to want to try and understand as best as I could from the beginning to the very end .
Big thanks John, Johnathan and Jordan three very wise men.
Vervaeke has changed my life. What a brilliant man
Really enjoy these conversations but feel this one is a bit more disjointed than the others. Still well worth 2 and one-half hours of my time. 👍
This conversation reminds me of the trialogues that Terrence McKenna, Rupert Sheldrake, and Ralph Abraham used to have, well-informed, insightful dives into the more difficult aspects of the human experience. Please have more conversations like this one. 🙏
Thank you for mentioning this. I'll have a listen to those~
I counter recommend another video to you: "J. Krishnamurti - Ojai 1982 - Discussion with Scientists 1 - Roots of psychological disorder" and treats some of the same topics as this video.
Yes !!! thank you gentlemen. We need more of these!
Expecting the 15 hour video response from Vanderklay
More of this, less culture war stuff, Dr. P!
I deeply dislike when Verseke is present as his worldview is strictly based off theory and loses practicality. He’s also domineering and steals the stage
I'm looking forward to the continuation of this. For some strange reason, one which I cannot consciously elaborate on properly, have the profound intuition that the foundational framework and bedrock on which a better world will be built is lying deep in whatever is happening in this conversation. It's not an easy task but I hope more people with such depth of knowledge and most importantly; acting out of goodwill (ἀγάπη) join this. The merger of the two worlds doesn't seem like an impossible task.
Thank you.
Lol I don't understand what they are saying, but it's funny to see how intellects communicate/debate. Its quite amazing
I love the conversations these guys come up with
I propose this convo needs Paul VanderKlay.
Why PVK? We need to ground these discussions into the solid earth of how to live; as in, to continually make sure it’s applicable to the lives we live.
Potential title for a video "Why I respect Jonathan Pageau"
This is one of my favorite convos that I’ve heard in a while. Thank you men. 🙏🏼
This conservation really pushes me to the edge (and beyond the limits) of my comprehension but I'll give this a go anyway.
It seems to me that there is some confusion here arising out of the idea that humans rely on narrative as a motivating and guiding force (for example, Jung's observation that a narrative is needed for a person to spend 10 hours looking at amoebae under a microscope). Because of this there is a tendency for Peterson to give narrative a privileged place above the nomological realm, whereas I see it the other way around - it's the rung on the ladder just beneath that allows to take the step up towards the sciences, and the truly universal laws.
That's not to say that it is less important - I don't object to Peterson's idea that narrative and meaning are what allows us to navigate our way through a world of infinite possibilities. But the fact that we rely so much on narrative to make our way in the world perhaps biases us towards it.
We understand laws by the way they embedded within a narrative, but the laws themselves are bigger than the narrative. The narrative is the lens that helps us to focus the infinite info something we can perceive.
I just want to add that is by far the most fascinating and challenging conversation I've heard from Peterson. Vervaeke and Pageau are brilliant guests - I can't wait for their next meeting.
We need the bishop too! Thank you Jordan! Keep up the good work! We're not counting on you, we're with you!
I propose this convo needs Paul Vanderklay.
We need to ground these discussions into the solid earth of how to live; as in, to continually make sure it’s applicable to the lives we live.
Jonathan's explanation of his Faith has helped me understand the reality of God better in a wonderful way
The room they have this conversation in is remarkable. I feel like they could have had a conversation about a moose hunt but then we get this gem. How far man has come but it is necessary and good to remember our past. I see a pattern of men around a fire telling stories. We were made for this.
I would sell my left arm to be around a campfire with these 3. Woah.
@@albertlevins9191 funny how UA-cam can serve that purpose but the actual experience would be so much more. I've sat at this particular camp fire 3 times so far and had to do a quick study on different subjects they refer to.
Of course music has a narrative-- some music more than others. A Beethoven symphony, say, with its statements and transformations, has a far more compelling narrative structure than some incidental music that is designed to be unobtrusive.
This is probably one of my favorite conversations. It's so uplifting to listen to the enthusiasm of the speakers when talking about such complex and abstract things.
Prioritizing: this happens biologically (we tend to turn our attention to things that we instinctually believe will help us survive), but also due to the degree our experience and beliefs line up with reality. We can be traumatized and/or taught/trained to desire what isn't good and fear what we need most. We can spend our lives caught up in these deceptions and (often subconsciously) prioritize what will eventually send us to Hell. We devolve into the worst version of ourselves because we worship idols that cannot save us.
What happens when a person surrenders their life to following Jesus is that God opens our eyes to HIS priorities, changes our hearts to fear Him as Lord and desire Him as the Highest Good. He changes our taste buds to enjoy what is good for us, and spit out what is bad. He changes our goals to live for His glory as our ultimate purpose and most satisfying meaning. He gives us His resources to love and live excellently - becoming loving, patient, kind, self-controlled, humble, honest people.
The fact that I can understand how chicken and spices have the same layout as a church as Jonathan pointed out really goes to show how much I've listened to his content.
I am simply not intelligent nor educated enough to understand these men
Yeah, but it’s fun to pretend!
Check out vervaeke's awakening from the meaning crisis. It'll give you more context and help understand a lot of the terms used
finally! the horsemen reunites! more of this pls
1:09:43 "You're not good if you're harmless". David Fuller take note.
Very appropriately titled. I enjoyed listening to the discussion. It makes me feel very out of place to listen to this while I do janitorial work though.
You can be a top lobster in any profession. More power to ya!
25:15 gotta disagree with the good Dr here. Isn't revenge a perversion of justice? Don't those who aim for evil do so in pursuit of their own perception of balance and justice? I think that Plato's idea stands.
This trialogue should be a regular podcast.
Best video by far in the past couple of years. Thank you.