Is that a dolly shot? Excellent. Too much production can interfere with the audience's ability to follow the discussion, but you're finding a great balance.
Looks like a good one , Thanks . That guy got blasted off his high horse , seems to try and play it down . Big ego . A bit of humility is a good thing .
Hey Chris, just wanted to say its such a good move to warm people up with clips before instead of after the podcast. Something Joe could learn from. (although I don't think he cares haha). Thank you so much for being such a wellrounded and intelligent man. Truly inspiring ❤
I was an atheist from the start and still am. I've consumed about 500 hours of Sam Harris content first, then started listening to Jordan Peterson. Harris taught me how to notice and uderstand my emotions and how to be happy with the present moment. Peterson taught me what my long-term priorities and needs are and helped me understand how to live in a way that is more productive to society. Listening to Harris was intelectualy stimulating, but did not really impact my life in a big way, other than making me a bit more happy in general. Listening to Peterson completely transformed the way I live and actualy "changed my life", making me a better person in all aspects of life.
"Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, he eats for a lifetime." The long game is harder, but the benefits you reap will come in due time with interest.
I think he also said that speaking to SH about religion was like speaking to a really intelligent 9 year old about it. Agree though both are great and would love to see them debate/chat again soon.
When I found out about Sam Harris, it was such a pleasant surprise. Not that I've watched every content of his, but the ones I've seen/heard so far almost gave me the feelings as if he were reading my mind.
No it makes a big difference because 1 u know its not just u thinking these thoughts and 2 you hear the reasons for the beliefs articulated in differnt words but with the same meaning so it is significant
Sam was my gateway into bettering my life about six years ago where he taught me to become more spiritual and subsequently spend hundreds of hours meditating. This opened my mind to the possibility of a more meaningful and purposeful life by changing my orientation to it. I then found Peterson where I spent hundreds of hours consuming his content and seeing him live, twice, and feel the development I made by listening to Sam and through meditation allowed me to deeply hear Petersons message and change the way I live my life, not just the way I feel about my life. I’ve woken up with the explicit goal of bettering myself for the sake of my future and those around me for several years now, thanks to these intellectual titans.
Alex this is absolutely wonderful. I have experienced the exact happening. After a few weeks of tuning into the quiet (through Sam's wisdom and accumulated knowledge) so much of Peterson's deep work and analysis started to resonate. Both intellectuals are, in many ways, two sides of some same coin. As Peterson swims beneath, Harris gives the hefty anchor with which to ground oneself among the lofty tides of self- inquiry.
You have described my experience almost exactly. I spent nearly a decade following meditative practice. Sam Harris was a large part of that. When I found Peterson I was older - late 30's - and I got on a plane to see him in Holland. I saw him again live (with Harris) in Dublin. Both served as important guides and father figures to me
@cabalpaxiarch7239 Amazing that you recommend reading. Have you read Sam and Jordan's books? Likely not. While you've done it softly, you have revealed a political bias, not an intellectual one. Reading those books is a good part of intellectual discovery and so is Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson. Oh, by the way, they have proven their pedigree by having a positive effect on thousands and thousands of lives. How many people look to you? Yeah, maybe not that many huh?
Respecful debate between intellects has always been a treasure. There hasn't been enough of it. These days, if people disagree they just hurl ugly insults.
'They needed some language to help them midwife their delivery into the clear light of reason' - this is an insightful recognition of where much of his value lands. For myself, listening to the likes of Sam, Dawkins, Hitchens and Fry, helped me clarify my thoughts on the role the religion played, and is playing in the world. I cannot thank them enough. There is no more powerful gift that I can think of, than leading others to think in a rational way.
The Catholic church should have canonized Galileo and his "revelations" from God. The church should have become the new center of further studies in that direction. It would have saved the church's credibility, it could have saved the world much pain and suffering.
The Church's rejection of Galileo's theories are overstated. I'm not saying it was right, but it wasn't because they were dummies The current solar system was redone so many times before and after Galileo that it's very subjective. It's hard to find the info because it's taboo, but look this up. It's also absolutely provable that the individual and the earth are cosmologically, not mathematically, the center of the universe affecting everything in their orbit, which is corroborated by manifestation, as well as Chinese mystics. They were both correct, although the mechanical universe as measured may still not be accurate.
I used to be a hardcore Sam Harris fan, I believed him when he said free will is an illusion, while that still may be true this belief did not aid me at all, infact I believe it made me nihilistic. It wasn't until I decided to take responsibility into my own hands and believe I had a choice in my life that I was able to turn myself around. I have Jordan Peterson to thank for that. While I still respect Sam greatly (and use his awakening meditation app) I am much more of a Peterson fan now. What you believe to be surely true has far more impact on your life then what may actually be true, because it affects your choices.
I take the Bret Weinstein position on free will. The amount you have is miniscule, but it's not zero. I also don't see the point of having this conversation publicly. What else can it cause in people but nihilism? It had no effect on me because I'm an odd duck, but Sam makes a very compelling case for no free will, and how does that manifest in most people?
@@JackSchitt-p9t in freedom from regret and forgiving oneself. that's at least what I achieved through the recogniction that the concept of free will doesn't make any logical sense.
There is factual truth and there is teleological Truth (the arrow which flies 'True'/my 'True' love...), an emergent property/ the 'fruit' of one's beliefs [Galatians5v22]. It may seem right to believe in no free will, but taking it away, by passing laws where all speech, trade, thought is either mandated or forbidden, is the Death of free will, and, whatever the intent, "Hell follows" [Rev6v8].
“What you believe to be surely true has far more impact on your life then what may actually be true, because it affects your choices.” Excellent words! I’ve always said that is determinism is true then what difference could it make for anything? Regardless if you believe in determinism or freewill, if determinism is actually true then it doesn’t matter, what matters is what you believe!
@@OrwellsHousecat Every time I hear him speak I find him to be quite intelligent and well spoken, but the endless false conspiracy nonsense, the fact that he refuses to address or apologise for it when it's inevitably proven to be false. It just gets tiresome after a while.
I wish someone like Sam would talk about Peterson before and after his severe medical problems. It seems as if JP has gone in a different direction since.
@@TakingTheMikehe actually starting see the life itself from a different perspective. He is the only one that are able to talk what he felt, not others like you. Much respect to Jordan, he become more humble, wise and emotional.
@@jonathansurovell3516I'm a POC too but don't want a black Bond too. That's just stupid virtue signaling. What else exactly do you have a problem with concerning Jordan Peterson? I personally lost interest because he's increasingly going into the religious direction which I don't care too much for. His stuff on psychology is still excellent though.
We need intellectuals who can rapidly adapt and change their minds on things. Sam and Jordan debates were great because they were challenging. They should discuss NON-religious/NON-atheist topics simply due to how eloquent they both are.
Real psychology can take many forms in the world. The psychology that occupies a place inside of many (not all) religions is the same psychology needed to unite a man's understanding of everything he knows and infers from the world, including all scientific thought. There is a cohesive realty that exists above all our 'sciences' and also above philosophy and art and religion, etc... These divisions are artificial, because the study of man from the viewpoint of his real possibility of inner change, ie. from real Psychology, is the oldest & most relevant science to us. A man can begin to see this more cohesive reality, and this is in reality what everyone is striving for. All to say that religions are not in themselves a psychology, no - but sometimes religions may contain something inside of them that's very different & can reach a man and begin to change the very character of his inner world & how he is able to see and understand himself and the outer world.
Harris is finished after shaming people who wanted to opt out of this corrupt system and didn't want to participate in experiment with shots and booster.
I prefer he focuses on non sensical ideas or beliefs followed by the masses, he's definitely a philosopher in that regard. Sam's helped me out of the Christian faith, I've always doubted the teachings, Sams logic helped to nail that coffin shut 😂
My experience with their debates was different...I felt neither of them had a deep enough depth of knowledge of epistemology for it to have been worthwhile. They touched on ideas about truth that gave over a 100 years of literature written around that debate, a knowledge of that would have given Sam more tools to challenge Jordan's stance on the existence of normative truth.
@@j_freed what something may religions contain inside them that is different (to what?) and reaches man and begins to change the very character of his inner world (in what way and what direction as opposed to, again, what?) to a point that he is able to understand better himself in relation to the outer-world?
@@diggie9598 I think it's a little more complicated than that, but you got the right idea! Haha I recently ordered the Sigma 18-35mm for my BMPCC4K and the footage looks nice.
Both the over-the-shoulder camera angles are flawed. Each is allowing unintentional bleed-in movement from the subject they're supposed to be shooting over the shoulder from. I agree the wide format/lighting etc does work well and is indeed cinematic but it's some way off perfect. Having said that, the intellectual content is - as always with Chris Williamson - interesting and informative.
SH: Two times three equals six. JP: Two times three equals the intangible evanescent process of unknowable numeracy linked to the transcendence of the highest hierarchical integral foundation of the ultimate structure of our being.
I think you're quoting what Deepak Chopra would say. Jordan Peterson would say "2x3=6 is true only if we are sure the human civilization won't get destroyed from that belief, otherwise it's false."
Harris has been working on a project of humanist based spirituality for 15 years now. His principle has been that, obviously, there must be a worst possible state of existence to avoid and a best one to promote. If such states exist, he has yet to foster any agreement between actual human beings on what those states might be.
His giant blindspots may not be a big deal to him, or the people 'in his lane' but they are to me. And he was not clipped out of context, at all. Free speech is only for things he thinks are not dangerous. Anyone with pretentions to being an intellectual ought not need the problem of "who decides though?" explained to them. It's a large and jarring incongruity, and his soft spoken disparagement "they are in an echo chamber" is a touch galling really.
Sam and Jordan are both brilliant in a fairly wide variety of topics. I always want to know what both of them think about issues. I also disagree with both on various things. It made me happy to hear they have no bad blood between them. At least on Sam's side.
I doubt there’s any bad blood on JP‘s side either. If I had to guess I would imagine that JP probably believes Sam needs a touch more faith in some of the invisible things, and maybe a little less in some of our institutions.
@@LordRykard9376except, that gives limited optionality, greater attack surface, and is long-term ineffective. However,we have no Elders that shun social clout in order to be sought in times of wisdom shortages.
I discovered Harris, Peterson, psychedelics and buddhism all around the same time. Sam is absolutely right about psychedelics, I started as an athiest and a very unspiritual person. Psychedelics unlocked spirituality for me as Harris describes here. I am still an athiest, but have adopted buddhism, and a lot of Peterson's philosophy and mindset on living a meaningful life.
Thanks for this Chris. I'm right leaning and I like Jordan Peterson a lot. It's nice to hear Sam talk here and he's obviously very sharp as well. I think I had a biased against him because some buddies of mine started worshiping him a few years ago so I kind of overcorrected and went hard into Jordan Peterson. I'm trying to live my life more openly when it comes to my information so i'm excited to hear this full podcast.
um. the, *i'm gonna half-listen to you while i pour myself a drink and there aren't enough cam angles to mask the totally distracting element of me doing that* part too? interesting.
I could listen to thinkers like Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson all day, every day and never get bored. Especially when they aren't just being interviewed but talking to one another about literally anything...
I'll reserve judgment until the full episode, but I'm concerned. I like a lot of what Sam has said throughout the years, but I'm increasingly getting the feeling that I will never hear the words "I was totally wrong on this" from his mouth. His stance change on Biden as the adult in the room does not quite qualify. Just like with Richard Dawkins who I also respect, what I expect from the "greatest thinkers of our time" is the ability to admit fault, straight up without excuses. However great your mind is, and however well thought out your arguments are, you are not immune from getting it wrong. I just want to hear an earnest admitting of fault occasionally, otherwise I find it impossible to take the rest seriously.
he has repeatedly admitted fault. just recently regarding the significance of early investigations into the lab leak hypothesis. are you even following his work?
@@-morrow are you man? He hasn't walked back the biggest take he's had which is his political censorship is good because he doesn't like the opposition. His response to criticism is to delete twitter and respond cut-an-paste that others are in an "echo" chamber when they criticize him. 😂 Maybe offer up rational argument agaisnt his critics. Maybe actually respond with clarity and not a 1000 word soup of actually not answering any questions about his his important takes. Rather he deflects by describing his alleged position within the political left to be the area of "reason" and argument (classical liberalism) and then describes others as fallen intellectuals to the right of center. Laughable man. Give us the reasons and points for your arguments. Reason is ideas and points. It is content to be debated over. Yet all Smith offers as of late is characterization and not rebuttal of other's critiques and 1000 word sentences of no definitive answer.
@@royce7034 well you sound pretty salty because he hasn't walked back points you disagree with, tough. yet strawmanning sam just reveals your dishonesty. find me the quote with source where he said "political censorship is good because he doesn't like the opposition". perhaps try to better understand his reasons before getting emotional.
@@-morrow how is he strawmanning Harris? By pointing out that he has no real argument for his comments on Hunter Bidens laptop? That's called pointing out the flaw in Sam's thought process. That points out Sam's dogma. It's religious. Just not Christian.
@@-morrow it's also what has grenaded his popularity. Harris' slip is showing and he's mad that everyone saw it (except for those with the same atheistic dogma he has). Just say that you were over the top and be done with it.
I was one of the people who's intellectual and spiritual awakening was in many ways caused by the conversations between Sam and Jordan. I'm very grateful to Sam for all the rumination he has given me. I think the Hunter Biden thing was more than a ridiculous thing to say, but I'm still grateful. I don't think there's much juice left to squeeze though, and that's why they don't talk anymore. Jordan has moved on to something more traditional, Sam still thinks what he thinks. There's other avenus to explore for fans that are more profitable
Sam would've been better off sticking to the facts which is... There is not one drop of evidence that there is even obe drop of evidence that Joe Biden is corrupt or took even 1 penny from his sons business dealings. Further, except for the assumption Hunter got his job because of his family tree there's no indication Hunter did anything corrupt either. He was a drug addicted party animal which is a non issue in terms of his fathers administration. It's about as relevant as voting based on what brand of toilet paper either Bidens uses... It's a fake scandal just like all the others fabricated by the right-wing wing such as Bengazi (sp?), Clinton wss running drugs in the 80s, etc
The conversation was over about an hour into their first conversation when Jordan decided to re define truth as “that which is useful to the species” And Sam pointed out in different terms to this: A is true but useless, B is useful but untrue Is A true? And Peterson couldn’t answer proving he is a complete waste of my time.
Harris is a narcissist and authoritarian, but if you ask him, he has to be because when you think about it rationally he’s so much smarter than everyone else so why wouldn’t they do exactly as he says?
Great guest. Will be looking forward to the full podcast next week. His conversation with Jordan on the nature of truth is still one of my favorite debates of all times. Hopefully they get together in the future and talk about philosophy (well, anything but politics. I don't care for either of their political views)
@74357175 It’s not an alternate definition of truth, Jordan just conflates “utility” with “truth”. The vast, vast majority of people immediately know what you mean when you say something is true. Jordan just twists his own definitions to serve his own purposes, even when no one else uses definitions the way he does. He’s not a very effective communicator specifically because of this
I'm looking forward to the full episode, I just hope that he can finally accept that he has blind spots and bad takes just like everyone else. A bit of humility would go a long way with this enlightened one 😄
@@saviormoney. What has he "proclaimed to be right"? He is allowed to have opinions like anyone else. If you have ever actually listened to his podcast, he's pretty clear about where he gets his information and how he vets his sources. And you would also know why he refuses to give a platform to certain people. Just because he's not publishing every conversation to the public doesn't mean he's not having those conversations.
Regarding his Hunter Biden controversy, Sam said "In my world, and in every channel I care about literally nothing had happened" So, everyone around agrees with him? That sounds a lot like and echo chamber.
At no point did he claim to be immune to Echo Chamber or audience capture, nor did he suggest that his own following is echo chamber free. He simply pointed out that Sam qnd Jordan have slightly different followings. From everything I've known of Sam, if he were asked directly of his following has echo Chambers or if he could himself be susceptible to audience capture, I believe he would say Yes
Everyone around him probably agrees the world is round and 2+2=4 too, is that an echo chamber in your mind? Literally NONE of the claims being pushed by right wing media about the laptop implicating Joe Biden have had any supporting evidence in the years since those claims.
@@robertblackwell8611 You give too much credit to someone who goes out of his way to show bad intellectual faith against such as Bret Weinstein, recently arguing that had covid been 100 times more lethal to children, then B.W.'s position would have been wrong. Harris is so rigidly ensconced in a bubble (search his guest list for ANY Trump supporter this side of Scott Adams) that it becomes highly projectional for him to talk about others who never left the larger discourse behind. Sam would never have Victor Davis Hanson or Gad Saad (today) on, or Christopher Rufo or James Lindsay -- as he would be destroyed.
oh ya he went on some other channel and tried to explain the whole mess and it just got worse --- he was certainly deranged on that interview with the russian comedian
Sam thinks that because something is predictable or explainable that it is not meaningful. Jordan understands that that perspective is one of arrogance.
I am new to Sam - but his words feel like they trend to ‘pulling down’. Jordan’s in my experience, have always pulled me up. Jordan’s work has helped me truely transform my relationship with myself, my wife, my son and my career. Sam’s work is…nice/interesting.
It’s because Sam Harris sees the world from a reductionist view. Everything can be reduced to matter. Jordan Peterson embraces the mystery and sees the bigger picture. It’s a totally different worldview. The reason we’ve been able to build great civilisations is the embrace of the mystery (call it God if you will). The moment we reduce everything down to matter we dehumanise ourselves in the process and we see the crumbling of society… which is happening right now. Pendulum will always swing to that what makes sense, hence we see a massive a departure from atheism
Sam is making the argument that religion, something that holds a deep Moral/philisophical weight to a large swathe of people can and should be arbitrarily engineered based on how he feels. And going by who he has been the past few years, I wonder if people are allowed to come to a conclusion he does not like.
Ok so we should all be religious because it comes with perks like a sense of meaning and happiness. And it doesn't matter if it's all make-believe? I guess it's hard to argue against that
@@ur-cb8xo Well you could just consider that it comes down to philosophy. In the ends being Amish is a philosophy - one that is sustainable, low-crime, low divorce rate, high degree of equality, and produces babies - lots of babies. It therefore outperforms many other forms of philosophy that measure themselves using the same measures of success - such as liberalism and socialism. However, I don't see socialists abandoning socialism because it keeps failing and then adapting a proven Amish philosophy to their needs. This makes you wonder what is the socialist motivation? The goal of equality, sustainability, fairness, justice - or the process? Perhaps they go for it because they expect more sex and a better job? When measured in terms purely of performance, being Amish is more credible than being socialist. You don't get much more religious than being Amish. G.K. Chesterton - "When men choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they then become capable of believing in anything" - especially things that are proven not to work, in preference to things that do.
@@ur-cb8xoIf its all make believe then there is no such thing as morality, only opinion. Sam still preaches his opinion like a religion anyway, but has no claim to its validity beyond. "I think therefore I'm right"
Sam helped me find peace within myself during the dark solitude times of the pandemic. Jordan taught me how to use my initial existential depression as a tool to practically pick myself up, be the best person I could be, and begin to help others expecting nothing in return. Both impactful, Jordan far more for me. In a way, it's been an exploration of both the differences of buddhism and christianity, but also how they can work together. I understand Sam doesn't claim to be buddhist, and Jordan just revealed (in his own way) that he's Christian. Appreciate them both.
I have listened and subscribed to Sam for at least 7 years and for a long time he was my go to intellectual for his articulate clarity on this crazy world. But something has shifted in the last couple of years, his podcasts aren't as stimulating as they used to be and I don't consume them as eagerly as I used to. His guests are often safe allies who don't challenge Sam in the ways that some of his past guests did, in particular Jordan Peterson. I really hope we get to see Sam duke it out in conversations with his intellectual rivals like he used to do more regularly. I wonder if we will see him on Joe Rogan again, or publicly converse with Bret Weinstein again. I'm looking forward to the full chat he had with you Chris! You're doing great work.
TDS That’s what happened. I’m in the same boat as you, I always thought Sam to be a very well thought out dispassionate thinker. But his passion around Trump was so strong it strayed into derangement. It’s hard to look at him, or listen to his opinions the same way after you see this.
You talk of 'talking to safe' allies in the case of Harris and so I have to ask, what do you think of Peterson not even 'taking calls' from Matt Dillahunty after their talk? Matt refused to get suckered by Peterson's fairy fingers and bogus determinations and now your hero won't talk to him.
Chris's skill to just sit and listen for long periods of time is commendable. I fell off the sam Harris bandwagon a long time ago with his tds. I guess he really still has it.
@@MrLegovas trump derangement syndrome. It's kind of the point of the "find bodies of kids in hunters basement and it wouldn't be as bad as trump getting another term" thing he refers to.
@@firefly9838which claim? How about the claim that Romania and Peterson are in an echo chamber, whilst Sam refuses to speak to anyone who doesn't share his opinion on everything. Hiw about the bit where he regurgitated every establishment anti trump piece of rhetoric and fully embraced the lockdown narrative. And despite being proven wrong on many accounts has never once admitted he was wrong, about anything
@@jc2604 I've been following Sam's work for over a decade and have read most of his books. In case you couldn't tell, this comment was a facetious take on Sam's stance on free will (which I agree with).
Harris actually criticised Peterson and at the same time didnt do it in a hatefull way, this is a first, everyone else either adores him or loathes him. I hope he can have a confrontational yet friendly conversation with Peterson, it could do so much good.
I first read The End of Faith and Letter to a Christian Nation around 2006, so I’ve been a fan of Sam Harris for a while. He’s always had somewhat technocratic tendencies, I always had a bit of a feeling he was up in the Ivory Tower looking down at the rest of us. But he’s taken that to the next level in recent years, he’s definitely changed. Why he puts so much stock in obviously corrupt institutions I don’t know, but it’s hard to listen to him now. I stopped listening to his podcast years ago.
“obviously corrupt institutions” Well I really hate to break it to you but that’s currently the best we have. The alternative, right now, to those “obviously corrupt institutions” is a bunch of uneducated, confident busybodies doing “their own research” (read: feeding their biases) to try to answer questions that only experts have the actual foundational tools to attempt to adequately answer. A bunch of morons Googling blog posts and UA-cam videos made by other ignorant-but-confident talking heads isn’t going to get us anywhere
I first learned of Peterson through his podcast conversation with Sam in 2017. Since then, I have been utterly mystified as to why anyone listens to him, more so as his popularity rose, and even more so as his cognitive faculties have faltered publicly. Peterson’s epistemological foundations were always unsound, and his retreat from any solid position always glaring. If he had helped you, great - but you could find better.
mind recommending someone better than Dr Peterson? I've asked this question probably a hundred times to people that make the exact same claim you just made - and I never get a proper response. I'm guessing because you have a Twitch streamer or something in mind while typing this, and are too ashamed to actually name someone. At least that's what I've started assuming when I see this claim made on Reddit. And please don't say someone like Gnome Chomsky, the guy that wanted to keep food from poor black people during covid for not trusting the government's vax mandates... that guy is off the rails and insane.
Fair enough. Different strokes for different folks. It's what one is looking for that determines these guys' value to others. Peterson is much more of a practical therapist/teacher than an intellectual academic. Yes, they are both technically academics, but Peterson's strengths are rooted in his ability to give people practical advice for improving their lives, regardless of a solid philosophical basis. He's very much a do-what-works kind of person, as most psychologists tend to be. That likely explains why he values Christianity so much. Harris is much more of a traditional philosopher type.
@@martymcfly88mph35 "Better" in what way? :D He talks about EVERYTHING and has seriously no clue about ANYTHING. Here is a list of people that are "better": With regards to politics: Anybody who has ever studies politics or read a newspaper (as opposed to Jordan Peterson) With regards to sociology: Anybody who has ever read a page of Habermas, Butler, Sassen. And so on and so on...
The Sam Harris/Jordan Peterson relationship is one of those cases that baffles me - when someone so smart and clear thinking (Harris) admires a crap artist whose thoughts are all muddled nonsense.
As per usual I find myself agreeing with Sam Harris and his stand on religion but totally against his politics and with Jordan Peterson I'm against his understanding of religion But agree with his politics this way I end up arguing with everybody
@@beowulf_of_wall_st I get what you mean but surely their worldview is a product of their experiences. I mean they grew up developing their worldview from living. They didn't get their worldview first. I definitely prefer JP to SH from a personality point of view.
Hahah funny. I end up somewhat similar, though I do think Jordan is becoming a bit rigid and ideological in his politics and I prefer his more narrowly-focused, psychological, meaning-centered lectures (pre fame and all that)
What’s ironic, from what I’m reading, and from my own experience is that Sam actually has helped people get to religious experience which of course he detests. I started listening to Sam about 7 years ago and thought he was great because I was an atheist who was clearly missing something. I bought 12 Rules for Life around that time, started reading and it mentioned God and I got rid of it because I was a stubborn atheist. About a year later I figured I’d be smart to give it another go and from then on Jordan’s message resonated with me. I would now say I am a Christian, who still sometimes struggles with the concept of God, but I fundamentally disagree with Sam’s overarching critique of religion. I find religion to be inevitable. And to me, the Christian ethic seems to line up with the path to the greatest good. I’m happy to have ran into both of these men.
I am so happy you talked to Sam. He has made comments that I agree with the main one here, being a massive overstatement, But i do think Sam is someone motivated to find whats real and reach out and touch it. He's a solid guest and a commendable person despite his faults
I started out as a Hitchens fan by watching his debates in the early 2010's, and that's how I came across Sam Harris. I have been a fan of his cool articulate intellect ever since. I discovered Jordan Peterson much later, about 2015, just as he was publishing his Maps and Meanings Lectures on UA-cam and the beginnings of his Bill c-16 issues were taking place. I am big fans of them both, I even remember posting an email to Sam's socials saying something along the lines of "you and Jordan Peterson should have a discussion, about literally any topic, I'm sure it will be fascinating" Both Sam and Jordan had done podcasts with Joe (another podcaster I got turned on to because of Sam, and Graham Hancock) immediately before they had their first chat, which turned out to be a bit of a misfire. As much as they see themselves as different from each other, and they are to be sure, I see them as being very similar too. like they are both trying to say the same thing, but using a different dialect. Sam's background as a neuroscientist gives his ideas a kind of 'outside in' perspective, like he is trying to understand consciousness by studying the mind externally, like trying to study the brain to better understand consciousness and thinking in terms of neurons and brain regions etc. whereas Jordan being a Psychologist seems to come at the same problem from a kind of 'inside out' perspective. ie he trying to study consciousness to better understand the brain, ie the idea of Jungian arc types representing the collective experiences of millions of humans all experiencing the operations of similar brain structures, and experiencing it as collectively shared behaviours and beliefs. Personally I am an atheist, so I interpret Jordan's religious references as a combination of metaphors and philosophical treatises, I actually think that is how Jordan interprets them too, I don't think he is a biblical literalist, though I may be wrong on that. That is where I think some of the disagreement comes from between the two, Sam spent his early online career with Hitch arguing against a literal interpretation of the bible. so when Jordan says the things in the bible are true, he means it, but only as Obi Wan would say, true from a certain point of view. I think they both have a lot to offer the world, they are both fascinating and they both believe in the importance of freedom of speech and respecting facts and science. I also think that they are both a little swayed by their respective echo chambers, but I think they are both able to keep their vision clear for the most part too. I personally would love to see them have another debate, or rather a conversation where neither party was trying to win points, or appeal to their fans, but just listen and learn from each other. I think that would be something to see.
"True From a Certain Point of View" is called Mythology, buddy. Therefor, that's not true. It's easily my biggest gripe with Peterson that he thinks that Truth doesn't need to be based off of Facts. That was an infuriating discussion with Sam that completely ruined my opinion of Peterson.
@GoodAvatar-ut5pq Thanks for taking the time to read that whole comment and replying. Personally I think I come in halfway between Peterson and Harris's perspectives. But there is a big difference between perspective based truth and mythology. For example, it is true that light is a wave, it is also true that light is a particle. It is highly likely that there exists a deeper truth that explains light more completly still. It does not follow that light is a myth because it is dependant on the perspective from which it is analysed. I realise that my example might seem a bit specific and not related to the topic, but it highlights my core argument, which is that truth can be dependant on the framework from which it is analysed.
Mythology is what it's name breaks down into, real or not? But you can hardly watch a movie or talk to someone when what you're interpreting doesn't break down into archetypes. And that's Mythology. I'm not buying religion but I'm not selling that from person to people there are similarities that can be mapped.
I never understand what people see in this guy. The way he talks aggravates me and I have never in all these years finished one of his books, an interview or one of his podcasts and felt like he actually said something insightful or useful. He works well to fall asleep to though 👍
I have watch the full version of "THE PODCAST" that he refers to and I don't understand how anyone has taken anything out of context. I can't see any other way to take it. Personally I think the "Stuck in his own Bubble" characterisation of Jordan Petersen is exactly what Sam Harris's problem is. For all his talk of rationalization and having clear arguments etc and yet I have never seen him clearly express any rational arguement for his comments on that podcast nor justify his borderline ridicule for those he deems are on the "right". I wish podcastors would push him more on this!
No I haven't. Watched multiple podcast since and twitter responses at the time but really thought they were all poorly done. Do you know which episode, can it be accessed without subscription @@rellify3 ?
@@ClydeusMaximus so it was hard to figure out Joe Jp and their respective audiences speak to those in the centre. or on the right to centre more traditionalist. Usually people say incorrect and then explain..
must admit Sam lost me a little bit with hunter thing, no amount of "naunce" or "context" will make it right, but he remains one of the best orators/word smiths. One can only marvel how eloquently and deliberate his expansive bouquet and choice of words are
Sam is incredibly intelligent, and he can't really process people disagreeing with him. I remember saying on Rogan one time if there is lab made meat on the market, he couldn't understand someone choosing to eat real meat over the lab made stuff. With the Hunter Biden Laptop, he can't process people seeing it differently. Although, very smart dude.
I want to hear more discussions between Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson. I find value in both of their point of view. It's interesting to listen to both angles and flesh out my thinking as a result of the interaction.
Both Sam and Jordan are important. A person who knows how to filter through information can understand that both don’t necessarily contradict each other, but compliment. Both have impacted my life in a big way. All I’ll say about Jordan is that he amplifies certain topics I don’t find necessary and the truly profound (imo) are not as highlighted and so, I think he can do better in prioritizing information. He could use less air time and a few breaks. Sam, is probably one of the most excellent communicators I’ve ever come across. That alone has changed the way I talk about pretty much everything in my life. His meditation app saved my life and a few of those around me. He has made me less successful employment wise in the short term, but overall a better human. The world doesn’t revolve around treating others well and unconditional love- and so I’ve suffered a little financially. But otherwise, im doing better, so it’s a decent trade off. Both are important and not necessarily at odds. In terms of trust in institutions and the media- he talks vaguely and carefully as he should- but ALOT of work needs to be done in those fields. I don’t think anyone has good enough ideas where to start.
Yes Sam its always OTHER people who are in an echo chamber. Not you 😂😂 Not the guy that just basically said that as long as his echo cha.. I mean "channels " which are the ones he cares about, agree with him, then he can't possibly be wrong about anything. 😂 Also fantastic job steel manning Jordan and Rogan at the end 😂 I totally didn't yell straw man like 3 times in 30 seconds.
Jordan really helped me out a few years back. I discovered him, like many did, when he caught attention for his public resistance of woke ideological nonsense. Then I found his other work like 12 Rules for life, his lectures... Fantastic, gave me a lot to think on. But his turn to religion of recent years really concerns me, and has somewhat turned me off him. I've seen people say that they used to be atheists until discovering his biblical series, and are now Christians. This is very concerning, considering he does not actually believe in god himself, as he all but admits when pushed, and just has a passion for the literature and an appreciation for the values it presents. He seems to advocate for belief in this literature being warranted based purely on the (subjective) value and meaning it gives people, and that the only way of finding meaning, and the only way to have a solid moral guidance, is to sign up to this ideology. He's went from admirably being an oponent of ideology and belief that contradicts reality (Transgenderism, feminism etc.) To fully embracing an ideology. His slimey use of "Well it depends what you mean by..." and his utter refusal to answer certain questions at all, let alone in a clear manner, is honestly just embarassing to watch.
@@scooterbarr325 As a psychological study of literature and mythology, absolutely. But as a promotion of religion and advocation of literal belief, I take issue with it.
I think the correct way to view Peterson is not as a philosopher but as a therapist. That's why he seems inconsistent: A therapist prescribes many things that might work for someone, even when they don't believe in them for themselves. Harris is much closer to a logically consistent philosopher type than Peterson. But the reason Peterson has had the more extensive reach is because he distills information for the masses better than Harris. That's to say nothing of Harris' incredibly polarizing statements about Trump and COVID-19.
@@roykeane1922 What kind of false equivalence is that? Of course Islam concerns me, but why does that mean I can't criticise Jordan Peterson? In fact I'm criticisng him for promoting religion, and though he names Christianity as his spiritual darling, these same criticisms can be applied to his friendliness to Islam.
Everyone has blind spots. That's essential to being human. Try to perceive everything without bias, and you risk destroying your ego. No ego means no daily functioning in life. Sam his high functioning in his daily life, because he has protected his ego.
Sam said that there's nothing on Hunter's laptop which could compare to Trump. Apparently Sam wasn't aware of what exactly was on the laptop, so to say iSam's statement didn't age well from the moment he said it is an understatement
@@pansophia93 Have you personally seen what's on the laptop? I have. And aside from evidence of financial wrong-doing, I saw only videos of him fucking prostitutes. Any attempt to ID someone as underage was unsuccessful.
10:16 Yeah... kinda. It's like his blind spot keeps growing and growing. So strange to have rock solid logic juxtaposed with apologia. He says he understands... but it's getting less and less convincing.
That’s more of a statement of their respective audiences rather than an indictment on either Harris or Peterson. Peterson has a younger, more impressionable, “lost” audience. There’s nothing but sympathy from me, and I get it. But Harris is for a more optimized adult who isn’t in that adolescent phase, who is seeking a more mature sense of peace and purpose.
@@tommykoed7493peterson is helping you to have a healthier ego. Harris is preaching meditation. Meditation is becoming aware of the present moment aside from thinking. Stepping back from your ego. Which leads to insights about the nature of life and reality. Peterson is working on giving you a positive ego. Harris is working on getting you out of ego . Healing yoir mind can lead to crying. But realization through meditation will often lead to laughter , the opposite. Because you realize your problems were imaginary
the color grading in this video is fantastic. Also, Sam still got it. I don't necessarily agree with every point he makes, but he is difficult it ignore in public discourse.
@@saviormoney. if you read his books and listened to his podcast and took nothing away then you are a poor learner. The ability to learn from people you disagree with is powerful
Sam, just casually suggesting psychedelics are beneficial to increasing spirituality is such a dangerous, simple minded view on this complex topic. Carl Jung himself stated to tread lightly when taking spirituality shortcuts, yeah it might be positive, but you’re kidding yourself if you dont think there is massive psychological danger for many people without proper preparation and a personality that is profoundly integrated and whole. Do not cheat spirituality or religion. This is coming from someone who is absolutely fond of psychedelics and their therapeutic use, but Harris… you’re leading an army into something you might not want.
To be fair, his "casual" reference is also backed up by hours and hours of talk on the subject (in other venues), including a section of his "Waking Up" book.
@@michaelrivera6989 : You mean UA-camr's like Sam Harris? Why wouldn't you take advice from someone you describe as THE MOST intelligent and rational person you've ever listened to? Sam Harris who recently said on a UA-cam podcast that "Hunter Biden literally could have had the corpses of children in his basement. I would not have cared". Are you also a psychopath whose heros are political hacks that subscribe to delusional ideologies?
Sam got me out of religion ten years ago, Jordan got me back into it recently. I still admire both of them to the fullest of my ability and I understand both of their perspectives in the debate. Hopefully they set up more discussions soon.
I don't know where you stand, religiously, but Robert Alter and Gary Rendsburg have made a huge impact on how I approach the bible. It's interesting how many atheist claims and accusations of scripture fall apart when you step out of their mindset and introduce even a little nuance.
@@stever7613 My stance is not well defined. I agree with the atheists in regards to the impossibility of supernatural events and the plethora of factual contradictions of the bible (I'm an engineer after all, so a scientist at heart). And I totally agree that the burden of proof is on the religious, and without any proof then the default stance should be atheism. But I also agree with Peterson who makes the claim that 1. moral values are fundamentally religious and cannot be scientifically extracted from the world i.e. ethics are deontological rather than consequential and 2. the bible being factually incorrect is irrelevant, as that is outweighed by the archetypal stories it outlines relating to the nature and behaviour of humans, which to Peterson makes the bible "true in the fundamental sense". I haven't yet bridged the gap between those two. Peterson's statement "I act as IF God exists" seems like it goes somewhere in-between, but there's no basis for it besides the utility it brings, which sounds a bit circular to me. I appreciate your suggestions and will be sure to check them out.
You're still stuck in their childish, binary, atheism vs. religion paradigm. Both platitudes are false attempts to explain the unknowable. Accept the mystery. Find your own moral center. Be your own example and watch your world change as you grow into it. All men must die. You must be reborn. When you live those words you will see the wisdom.
Both men equally make a difference and are deep thinkers, just because they disagree on things it should not undermine their significance on others. my personal experience, when listening to Jordan Peterson has opened my eyes to the systematic limited beliefs we were programmed to since we were born and forced me to use my critical thinking and question the validity of things we see and hear on mainstream media.
Both men are interesting, because they aren't dumb and they are bold. But mainly both men are good marketers, and that's why we know about them. Neither are better thinkers or more profound than your average college philosophy professor or even well-read taxi driver. It's actually not the depth, uniqueness or even clarity of their propositions that draws us to them, it's their ability to market and appeal to our emotions. Same with Joe Rogan. I just want to put out there that it's important to be aware that the people we are talking about here have as their biggest talent marketing and salesmanship. It's just done in a way that sounds intellectual (more intellectual than it really is). I find it more interesting to listen to either of them not as much because of any brilliance, but to understand what it is that people are lacking or desperate for, for better or for worse. Same with the youtuber making this podcast. No special talent that is greater than their quite good talent = mastering the UA-cam algorithm and triggering people enough to get lots of hits.
I can say that Sam taught me how to think rationally and how to prioritise rationality. It has completely changed the way I see the world and kept me away from religous or cultural feudalism. He brought peace into my life. JP on the other hand gave very basic advice, which I think could be good for someone who hit rockbottom, but not me...
I sincerely think he believes himself objective and consistent, and then he says things like, "contrarian echo chamber." He's so self assured he misses his oxymoronic, contradictory positions while being dismissive of others pov.
Inam actually more of a Petersen fan than Harris, but whathe says about Rogan etc being in an echo chamber of half truths etc is absolutely spot on here.
'The burden is on us, at this point in history, to find a truly non-sectarian way or telling ourselves a story about what we value and what is possible.' - Sam Harris. This is the fundamental point for me. As much as I respect people of faith.
As an agnostic, and somebody who believes in logic, I think this is palpable nonsense. Firstly it is not a matter for non believers to come up with anything other than to live their one life with minimum suffering and maximum fun. Most atheists understand that - which is why they are not having kids. It is this fact that undermines any claim that atheists have that the burden of defining a better future comes down to them. Atheists are bound to go extinct leaving only the religious to re-populate the world. The future is Amish. A culture that produces 6 kids per couple and retains 90% of them in the belief system will take over America in 200 years and taken over the world shortly after. Atheism doesn't have a future. You might not like that conclusion but it is the inevitable result of the differentiated rates of reproduction between fundamentalist religion vs atheism and the fact that we know that religious belief is in the genes. Atheism is the best thing that ever happened to religion - and the people at the top of Islam and the Catholic Church already know this - which is why they are trying so hard to convert each other and don't give a damn about atheists.
This point in history? That has never been done. What you find instead is people like SH who have images of dead children in people's basements that don't bother them in the least compared to the scandal at Bump Univesity.
When I was a young man it was spellbinding to listen to Sam take 12 minutes to over explain a simple question while saying almost nothing profound or inspiring. If your gonna tease me for that long, there should be a payoff. He sounds so much like the preachers and teachers I grew up with. He is the same wolf wearing a different cloth.
@@firefly9838 You're clearly missing a hell of a lot of context, I recommend you watch his interview with Triggernometry. Also, how you can say he was right on Trump compared to the shiteshow of the Biden Administration is utterly laughable. Trump was far better for The US, and you clearly buy into whatever narrative you're sold.
The "I used to like Sam until he got TDS" line is so tired-I know it's difficult to hear for you acolytes of the autocratic, conspiracy-mongering, faux-christian grifter who sought to undermine our democracy, but Sam's take on Trump was dead on.
@@collingwoodartdolls634 Woah! That's lucky. But that won't last. COVID will get you sooner or later. That or not doing everything that Dr. Sam Harris says, even though you have no choice.
Imagine Joe Rogan, one of the dumbest people on the planet, saying he still has hope for Sam Harris, one of the smartest people on the planet. It just makes my brain hurt.
I dont hope for any kind of rekindled relationship, unless Sam can somehow get through to Jordan. I dont know how genuine Jordan is in the first place either though.
Hello you legends. Watch the full 3+ hour podcast with Sam now - ua-cam.com/video/carZ3_02-Xg/v-deo.html
Thanks champ
Is that a dolly shot? Excellent. Too much production can interfere with the audience's ability to follow the discussion, but you're finding a great balance.
Looks like a good one , Thanks . That guy got blasted off his high horse , seems to try and play it down . Big ego . A bit of humility is a good thing .
It's Tuesday today. Do you mean that it will come out next Monday?
Hey Chris, just wanted to say its such a good move to warm people up with clips before instead of after the podcast. Something Joe could learn from. (although I don't think he cares haha).
Thank you so much for being such a wellrounded and intelligent man. Truly inspiring ❤
I was an atheist from the start and still am.
I've consumed about 500 hours of Sam Harris content first, then started listening to Jordan Peterson.
Harris taught me how to notice and uderstand my emotions and how to be happy with the present moment.
Peterson taught me what my long-term priorities and needs are and helped me understand how to live in a way that is more productive to society.
Listening to Harris was intelectualy stimulating, but did not really impact my life in a big way, other than making me a bit more happy in general.
Listening to Peterson completely transformed the way I live and actualy "changed my life", making me a better person in all aspects of life.
Great comment
Taught u something he doesnt apply himself. And ur still enraptured by him......
Thoughtful stuff, there. Thanks for sharing.
"Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, he eats for a lifetime." The long game is harder, but the benefits you reap will come in due time with interest.
@@whynot1548 And I am pretty sure OP fails to practice what Peterson "taught him" as well. We always fail to live up to our standards.
When Jordan was asked who his smartest opposition is, he said Sam. There is a lot of respect between the two. They're both great.
I think he also said that speaking to SH about religion was like speaking to a really intelligent 9 year old about it.
Agree though both are great and would love to see them debate/chat again soon.
Jordan is too polite. Alex O'Connor or Matt Dilahunty would be a tougher opponent and I don't rate either very much.
@@alisterrebelo9013Doesn't matter that you don't rate either, because Peterson is practically incoherent on religion
hes not really a match because sam is forthright and speaks clearly while jordan is wishy washy and loves nuance
@@mljh11 I put out an opinion and then you replied with an unsupported assertion. Good thing I'm an Aussie and I can say 'stiff sh!t' to you.
When I found out about Sam Harris, it was such a pleasant surprise. Not that I've watched every content of his, but the ones I've seen/heard so far almost gave me the feelings as if he were reading my mind.
So he made no difference in your life. Right?
Bro SAME
No it makes a big difference because 1 u know its not just u thinking these thoughts and 2 you hear the reasons for the beliefs articulated in differnt words but with the same meaning so it is significant
Sam was my gateway into bettering my life about six years ago where he taught me to become more spiritual and subsequently spend hundreds of hours meditating. This opened my mind to the possibility of a more meaningful and purposeful life by changing my orientation to it. I then found Peterson where I spent hundreds of hours consuming his content and seeing him live, twice, and feel the development I made by listening to Sam and through meditation allowed me to deeply hear Petersons message and change the way I live my life, not just the way I feel about my life. I’ve woken up with the explicit goal of bettering myself for the sake of my future and those around me for several years now, thanks to these intellectual titans.
Alex this is absolutely wonderful. I have experienced the exact happening. After a few weeks of tuning into the quiet (through Sam's wisdom and accumulated knowledge) so much of Peterson's deep work and analysis started to resonate. Both intellectuals are, in many ways, two sides of some same coin. As Peterson swims beneath, Harris gives the hefty anchor with which to ground oneself among the lofty tides of self- inquiry.
"Woken up" ♥️
You have described my experience almost exactly. I spent nearly a decade following meditative practice. Sam Harris was a large part of that. When I found Peterson I was older - late 30's - and I got on a plane to see him in Holland. I saw him again live (with Harris) in Dublin.
Both served as important guides and father figures to me
@cabalpaxiarch7239 Amazing that you recommend reading. Have you read Sam and Jordan's books? Likely not. While you've done it softly, you have revealed a political bias, not an intellectual one. Reading those books is a good part of intellectual discovery and so is Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson. Oh, by the way, they have proven their pedigree by having a positive effect on thousands and thousands of lives. How many people look to you? Yeah, maybe not that many huh?
Imagine getting inspiration from JP. Good grief. Watch some more news’s special on JP and prepare to cringe.
Respecful debate between intellects has always been a treasure. There hasn't been enough of it. These days, if people disagree they just hurl ugly insults.
Unfortunately Sam isn’t interested in debate these days. He’s interested in people that agree unequivocally with everything he says
@@josh23992 Meanwhile Jordan Peterson spends most of his time these days on Twitter, getting mad about Elliot Page and fat swimsuit models.
You boys just made @rpmgrlca's point I think.
Neither are intellects
@@kelvincasing5265they are just fleshy bots who don't think.
'They needed some language to help them midwife their delivery into the clear light of reason' - this is an insightful recognition of where much of his value lands. For myself, listening to the likes of Sam, Dawkins, Hitchens and Fry, helped me clarify my thoughts on the role the religion played, and is playing in the world. I cannot thank them enough. There is no more powerful gift that I can think of, than leading others to think in a rational way.
The Catholic church should have canonized Galileo and his "revelations" from God. The church should have become the new center of further studies in that direction. It would have saved the church's credibility, it could have saved the world much pain and suffering.
Why ?They would still be peddling fictional man made stories as divine revelation.@@counterflow5719
@@counterflow5719Bazingo. 👏
The Church's rejection of Galileo's theories are overstated. I'm not saying it was right, but it wasn't because they were dummies The current solar system was redone so many times before and after Galileo that it's very subjective. It's hard to find the info because it's taboo, but look this up. It's also absolutely provable that the individual and the earth are cosmologically, not mathematically, the center of the universe affecting everything in their orbit, which is corroborated by manifestation, as well as Chinese mystics. They were both correct, although the mechanical universe as measured may still not be accurate.
@@DaneTrumbore Nope.
I used to be a hardcore Sam Harris fan, I believed him when he said free will is an illusion, while that still may be true this belief did not aid me at all, infact I believe it made me nihilistic. It wasn't until I decided to take responsibility into my own hands and believe I had a choice in my life that I was able to turn myself around. I have Jordan Peterson to thank for that. While I still respect Sam greatly (and use his awakening meditation app) I am much more of a Peterson fan now. What you believe to be surely true has far more impact on your life then what may actually be true, because it affects your choices.
I take the Bret Weinstein position on free will. The amount you have is miniscule, but it's not zero. I also don't see the point of having this conversation publicly. What else can it cause in people but nihilism? It had no effect on me because I'm an odd duck, but Sam makes a very compelling case for no free will, and how does that manifest in most people?
@@JackSchitt-p9t in freedom from regret and forgiving oneself. that's at least what I achieved through the recogniction that the concept of free will doesn't make any logical sense.
I feel almost exactly the same way.
There is factual truth and there is teleological Truth (the arrow which flies 'True'/my 'True' love...), an emergent property/ the 'fruit' of one's beliefs [Galatians5v22]. It may seem right to believe in no free will, but taking it away, by passing laws where all speech, trade, thought is either mandated or forbidden, is the Death of free will, and, whatever the intent, "Hell follows" [Rev6v8].
“What you believe to be surely true has far more impact on your life then what may actually be true, because it affects your choices.”
Excellent words!
I’ve always said that is determinism is true then what difference could it make for anything? Regardless if you believe in determinism or freewill, if determinism is actually true then it doesn’t matter, what matters is what you believe!
It's amazing how he and Maajid Nawaz started the same tour together and ended up at opposite positions on everything in the years that followed.
@@OrwellsHousecat Nawaz is a total crank.
Could you elaborate further?
@@OrwellsHousecat Every time I hear him speak I find him to be quite intelligent and well spoken, but the endless false conspiracy nonsense, the fact that he refuses to address or apologise for it when it's inevitably proven to be false. It just gets tiresome after a while.
@@davidhughes8795 which conspiracy theory?
@@OrwellsHousecat What exactly wouldn't I want to admit? And perhaps he does. You be the judge.
I wish someone like Sam would talk about Peterson before and after his severe medical problems. It seems as if JP has gone in a different direction since.
Now he rants angrily about a black actor playing James Bond.
I agree. I think Peterson has become a bit too crazy to be considered a force for good.
Yep
@@TakingTheMikehe actually starting see the life itself from a different perspective. He is the only one that are able to talk what he felt, not others like you. Much respect to Jordan, he become more humble, wise and emotional.
@@jonathansurovell3516I'm a POC too but don't want a black Bond too. That's just stupid virtue signaling. What else exactly do you have a problem with concerning Jordan Peterson? I personally lost interest because he's increasingly going into the religious direction which I don't care too much for. His stuff on psychology is still excellent though.
We need intellectuals who can rapidly adapt and change their minds on things. Sam and Jordan debates were great because they were challenging. They should discuss NON-religious/NON-atheist topics simply due to how eloquent they both are.
Real psychology can take many forms in the world. The psychology that occupies a place inside of many (not all) religions is the same psychology needed to unite a man's understanding of everything he knows and infers from the world, including all scientific thought.
There is a cohesive realty that exists above all our 'sciences' and also above philosophy and art and religion, etc... These divisions are artificial, because the study of man from the viewpoint of his real possibility of inner change, ie. from real Psychology, is the oldest & most relevant science to us.
A man can begin to see this more cohesive reality, and this is in reality what everyone is striving for.
All to say that religions are not in themselves a psychology, no - but sometimes religions may contain something inside of them that's very different & can reach a man and begin to change the very character of his inner world & how he is able to see and understand himself and the outer world.
Harris is finished after shaming people who wanted to opt out of this corrupt system and didn't want to participate in experiment with shots and booster.
I prefer he focuses on non sensical ideas or beliefs followed by the masses, he's definitely a philosopher in that regard. Sam's helped me out of the Christian faith, I've always doubted the teachings, Sams logic helped to nail that coffin shut 😂
My experience with their debates was different...I felt neither of them had a deep enough depth of knowledge of epistemology for it to have been worthwhile. They touched on ideas about truth that gave over a 100 years of literature written around that debate, a knowledge of that would have given Sam more tools to challenge Jordan's stance on the existence of normative truth.
@@j_freed what something may religions contain inside them that is different (to what?) and reaches man and begins to change the very character of his inner world (in what way and what direction as opposed to, again, what?) to a point that he is able to understand better himself in relation to the outer-world?
Shoutout to the production crew. This looks as cinematic as most major films. Well done!
Seriously! It's gorgeous!
Great mic, great camera. Boom done, no magic.
@@diggie9598 I think it's a little more complicated than that, but you got the right idea! Haha I recently ordered the Sigma 18-35mm for my BMPCC4K and the footage looks nice.
Its too much.
Both the over-the-shoulder camera angles are flawed. Each is allowing unintentional bleed-in movement from the subject they're supposed to be shooting over the shoulder from. I agree the wide format/lighting etc does work well and is indeed cinematic but it's some way off perfect. Having said that, the intellectual content is - as always with Chris Williamson - interesting and informative.
SH: Two times three equals six.
JP: Two times three equals the intangible evanescent process of unknowable numeracy linked to the transcendence of the highest hierarchical integral foundation of the ultimate structure of our being.
I think you're quoting what Deepak Chopra would say. Jordan Peterson would say "2x3=6 is true only if we are sure the human civilization won't get destroyed from that belief, otherwise it's false."
Harris has been working on a project of humanist based spirituality for 15 years now.
His principle has been that, obviously, there must be a worst possible state of existence to avoid and a best one to promote.
If such states exist, he has yet to foster any agreement between actual human beings on what those states might be.
@@makmanos Either way he'd spew absolute garbage.
JP. Starts crying
@@makmanos You make a good point, but that is only true if the human civilization won't get destroyed from that belief, otherwise it's false
For a guy who understands steel manning that characterization of Rogan and audience capture is a crazy statement…
His giant blindspots may not be a big deal to him, or the people 'in his lane' but they are to me. And he was not clipped out of context, at all. Free speech is only for things he thinks are not dangerous. Anyone with pretentions to being an intellectual ought not need the problem of "who decides though?" explained to them. It's a large and jarring incongruity, and his soft spoken disparagement "they are in an echo chamber" is a touch galling really.
If by "crazy" you mean "rational" than I agree with you.
@@elmoblatch9787 to clarify I meant out of touch with reality
Sam and Jordan are both brilliant in a fairly wide variety of topics. I always want to know what both of them think about issues. I also disagree with both on various things. It made me happy to hear they have no bad blood between them. At least on Sam's side.
Took the words right out of my mouth
I doubt there’s any bad blood on JP‘s side either. If I had to guess I would imagine that JP probably believes Sam needs a touch more faith in some of the invisible things, and maybe a little less in some of our institutions.
Sam's Trump Derangement Syndrome completely negates anything he has to say at this point.
@@johnbuckner2828 yeah I can't picture JP holding a grudge against anyone unless it was something really serious, personal and unrepentant.
@@LordRykard9376except, that gives limited optionality, greater attack surface, and is long-term ineffective. However,we have no Elders that shun social clout in order to be sought in times of wisdom shortages.
I discovered Harris, Peterson, psychedelics and buddhism all around the same time. Sam is absolutely right about psychedelics, I started as an athiest and a very unspiritual person. Psychedelics unlocked spirituality for me as Harris describes here. I am still an athiest, but have adopted buddhism, and a lot of Peterson's philosophy and mindset on living a meaningful life.
IMO it's all about states of autonomic regulation!
By definition if you believe in something metaphysical that has any interaction with human beings, you are not an atheist.
You should have found Alan Watts first.
@@haveaday1812 Buddhism is not necessarily metaphysical.
@@davidlee4903 Yes actually this was the case, and then the rest follows.
Thanks for this Chris. I'm right leaning and I like Jordan Peterson a lot. It's nice to hear Sam talk here and he's obviously very sharp as well. I think I had a biased against him because some buddies of mine started worshiping him a few years ago so I kind of overcorrected and went hard into Jordan Peterson. I'm trying to live my life more openly when it comes to my information so i'm excited to hear this full podcast.
give his mindfulness app a shot ... it's genuinely life changing
Same!
What's considered "right leaning" these days is still incredibly liberal
@@tayzk5929 lol not me
Not as sharp as Gad Saad.
Sam Harris been doing those 8 hour arm workouts lately 💪
Probably been working on grip strength after chatting to Pete Attia
It was his choice, he had no say in the matter. It was meant to be.
I miss rich piana
He doesnt have free will, so the weights just kind of appear in his arms and hang there all day.
Haven't noticed that, thank for shifting my timeline
The production is impressive and basically so good that it becomes comic. It’s a mix between thriller interrogation scene and RPG cutscene aesthetics.
um. the, *i'm gonna half-listen to you while i pour myself a drink and there aren't enough cam angles to mask the totally distracting element of me doing that* part too? interesting.
@@DanielBoonelight yeah, especially that part. Such a power move by Chris having a drink.
@@AntonKuznetsovMusic yikes
Is it so distracting though ?
@@Jpravo no not really
I could listen to thinkers like Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson all day, every day and never get bored. Especially when they aren't just being interviewed but talking to one another about literally anything...
I'll reserve judgment until the full episode, but I'm concerned. I like a lot of what Sam has said throughout the years, but I'm increasingly getting the feeling that I will never hear the words "I was totally wrong on this" from his mouth. His stance change on Biden as the adult in the room does not quite qualify.
Just like with Richard Dawkins who I also respect, what I expect from the "greatest thinkers of our time" is the ability to admit fault, straight up without excuses. However great your mind is, and however well thought out your arguments are, you are not immune from getting it wrong. I just want to hear an earnest admitting of fault occasionally, otherwise I find it impossible to take the rest seriously.
he has repeatedly admitted fault. just recently regarding the significance of early investigations into the lab leak hypothesis. are you even following his work?
@@-morrow are you man? He hasn't walked back the biggest take he's had which is his political censorship is good because he doesn't like the opposition. His response to criticism is to delete twitter and respond cut-an-paste that others are in an "echo" chamber when they criticize him. 😂 Maybe offer up rational argument agaisnt his critics. Maybe actually respond with clarity and not a 1000 word soup of actually not answering any questions about his his important takes. Rather he deflects by describing his alleged position within the political left to be the area of "reason" and argument (classical liberalism) and then describes others as fallen intellectuals to the right of center. Laughable man. Give us the reasons and points for your arguments. Reason is ideas and points. It is content to be debated over. Yet all Smith offers as of late is characterization and not rebuttal of other's critiques and 1000 word sentences of no definitive answer.
@@royce7034 well you sound pretty salty because he hasn't walked back points you disagree with, tough. yet strawmanning sam just reveals your dishonesty. find me the quote with source where he said "political censorship is good because he doesn't like the opposition". perhaps try to better understand his reasons before getting emotional.
@@-morrow how is he strawmanning Harris? By pointing out that he has no real argument for his comments on Hunter Bidens laptop? That's called pointing out the flaw in Sam's thought process. That points out Sam's dogma. It's religious. Just not Christian.
@@-morrow it's also what has grenaded his popularity. Harris' slip is showing and he's mad that everyone saw it (except for those with the same atheistic dogma he has). Just say that you were over the top and be done with it.
I was one of the people who's intellectual and spiritual awakening was in many ways caused by the conversations between Sam and Jordan. I'm very grateful to Sam for all the rumination he has given me. I think the Hunter Biden thing was more than a ridiculous thing to say, but I'm still grateful. I don't think there's much juice left to squeeze though, and that's why they don't talk anymore. Jordan has moved on to something more traditional, Sam still thinks what he thinks. There's other avenus to explore for fans that are more profitable
Sam would've been better off sticking to the facts which is...
There is not one drop of evidence that there is even obe drop of evidence that Joe Biden is corrupt or took even 1 penny from his sons business dealings. Further, except for the assumption Hunter got his job because of his family tree there's no indication Hunter did anything corrupt either. He was a drug addicted party animal which is a non issue in terms of his fathers administration. It's about as relevant as voting based on what brand of toilet paper either Bidens uses...
It's a fake scandal just like all the others fabricated by the right-wing wing such as Bengazi (sp?), Clinton wss running drugs in the 80s, etc
If I my ask, how old were you when you listened to these conversations?
Lol your user name makes this post hilarious
The conversation was over about an hour into their first conversation when Jordan decided to re define truth as “that which is useful to the species”
And Sam pointed out in different terms to this:
A is true but useless, B is useful but untrue
Is A true?
And Peterson couldn’t answer proving he is a complete waste of my time.
Can you or anyone else link me to what Sam said about Hunter Biden? Thanks
They are both incredible people. They have helped me navigate different subsections of my life. Both have my utmost respect!
Harris is a narcissist and authoritarian, but if you ask him, he has to be because when you think about it rationally he’s so much smarter than everyone else so why wouldn’t they do exactly as he says?
This
I lost some respect for Jordan when I heard him talking about atheism. He's not a fan of it
@@VinnieG- so because he has his own opinion, an unpopular one at that, made you lose respect for the guy? Seems ridiculous to me.
I like both but overall Sam > Jordan
At minute 5 I realized I have no idea what was the question and what Sam is going on about. Yep cant wait for the 3 hour ep
Love Sam Harris' precise conversation on intellectual topics! Always learning something new when listening to his podcast :)
Great guest. Will be looking forward to the full podcast next week. His conversation with Jordan on the nature of truth is still one of my favorite debates of all times. Hopefully they get together in the future and talk about philosophy (well, anything but politics. I don't care for either of their political views)
Yeah, loved that Truth convo!
Loved that convo, and even though I disagree with Jordan on that question, he made me think more carefully about alternative definitions of truth
@74357175
It’s not an alternate definition of truth, Jordan just conflates “utility” with “truth”. The vast, vast majority of people immediately know what you mean when you say something is true. Jordan just twists his own definitions to serve his own purposes, even when no one else uses definitions the way he does. He’s not a very effective communicator specifically because of this
I love both Sam's and Jordan's and how different they are, two people who've opened my mind to many, many important ideas.
I'm always baffled by how beautifully Sam expresses his thoughts. It's a true joy listening to him speak.
What is beautiful about it?
I think he is well spoken, has a great and very precise vocabulary, and seems to pick his words carefully. But that’s just my opinion :)
@@vaffelproductions Agreed. Whenever somebody eloquently puts together complex thoughts with precise vocabulary, I think it’s beautiful.
Same, man. That little midwife metaphor was something else
@@DollarTreee You would love the Sophists.
I'm looking forward to the full episode, I just hope that he can finally accept that he has blind spots and bad takes just like everyone else. A bit of humility would go a long way with this enlightened one 😄
Has he ever said otherwise? This sounds like projection.
He often back tracks on things he's said or clarifies how he got something wrong.
Question for you - what's a big topic you were wrong about recently?
I've never heard him backtrack genuinely, especially with the biggest one which he's asked about. I'm not aware of all of his statements tho tbh
@@saviormoney. How so?
@@saviormoney. What has he "proclaimed to be right"? He is allowed to have opinions like anyone else.
If you have ever actually listened to his podcast, he's pretty clear about where he gets his information and how he vets his sources. And you would also know why he refuses to give a platform to certain people. Just because he's not publishing every conversation to the public doesn't mean he's not having those conversations.
All three of these men have had such a wonderful effect on my life and mind. Differences have only accelerated my growth. Thank you!
This guy was easily the 5th best Batman in the last 50 years of Cinema.
Regarding his Hunter Biden controversy, Sam said "In my world, and in every channel I care about literally nothing had happened" So, everyone around agrees with him? That sounds a lot like and echo chamber.
He's saying that what Hunter Biden did doesn't matter in regards to Joe Biden as Hunter's laptop was used to undermine Joe during election.
At no point did he claim to be immune to Echo Chamber or audience capture, nor did he suggest that his own following is echo chamber free. He simply pointed out that Sam qnd Jordan have slightly different followings. From everything I've known of Sam, if he were asked directly of his following has echo Chambers or if he could himself be susceptible to audience capture, I believe he would say Yes
Everyone around him probably agrees the world is round and 2+2=4 too, is that an echo chamber in your mind? Literally NONE of the claims being pushed by right wing media about the laptop implicating Joe Biden have had any supporting evidence in the years since those claims.
@@robertblackwell8611
You give too much credit to someone who goes out of his way to show bad intellectual faith against such as Bret Weinstein, recently arguing that had covid been 100 times more lethal to children, then B.W.'s position would have been wrong.
Harris is so rigidly ensconced in a bubble (search his guest list for ANY Trump supporter this side of Scott Adams) that it becomes highly projectional for him to talk about others who never left the larger discourse behind.
Sam would never have Victor Davis Hanson or Gad Saad (today) on, or Christopher Rufo or James Lindsay -- as he would be destroyed.
oh ya he went on some other channel and tried to explain the whole mess and it just got worse --- he was certainly deranged on that interview with the russian comedian
Sam thinks that because something is predictable or explainable that it is not meaningful.
Jordan understands that that perspective is one of arrogance.
I am new to Sam - but his words feel like they trend to ‘pulling down’. Jordan’s in my experience, have always pulled me up. Jordan’s work has helped me truely transform my relationship with myself, my wife, my son and my career. Sam’s work is…nice/interesting.
It’s because Sam Harris sees the world from a reductionist view. Everything can be reduced to matter. Jordan Peterson embraces the mystery and sees the bigger picture. It’s a totally different worldview. The reason we’ve been able to build great civilisations is the embrace of the mystery (call it God if you will). The moment we reduce everything down to matter we dehumanise ourselves in the process and we see the crumbling of society… which is happening right now. Pendulum will always swing to that what makes sense, hence we see a massive a departure from atheism
Can’t wait to hear more from my favorite determinist about how we should do things differently!
Could you unpack that, please?
Sam is making the argument that religion, something that holds a deep Moral/philisophical weight to a large swathe of people can and should be arbitrarily engineered based on how he feels. And going by who he has been the past few years, I wonder if people are allowed to come to a conclusion he does not like.
Ok so we should all be religious because it comes with perks like a sense of meaning and happiness. And it doesn't matter if it's all make-believe? I guess it's hard to argue against that
@@ur-cb8xo that's a strawman fallacy.
@@ur-cb8xo Well you could just consider that it comes down to philosophy. In the ends being Amish is a philosophy - one that is sustainable, low-crime, low divorce rate, high degree of equality, and produces babies - lots of babies. It therefore outperforms many other forms of philosophy that measure themselves using the same measures of success - such as liberalism and socialism. However, I don't see socialists abandoning socialism because it keeps failing and then adapting a proven Amish philosophy to their needs. This makes you wonder what is the socialist motivation? The goal of equality, sustainability, fairness, justice - or the process? Perhaps they go for it because they expect more sex and a better job? When measured in terms purely of performance, being Amish is more credible than being socialist. You don't get much more religious than being Amish.
G.K. Chesterton - "When men choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they then become capable of believing in anything" - especially things that are proven not to work, in preference to things that do.
@@saviormoney. do you really think religious books are factual?
@@ur-cb8xoIf its all make believe then there is no such thing as morality, only opinion. Sam still preaches his opinion like a religion anyway, but has no claim to its validity beyond. "I think therefore I'm right"
Sam helped me find peace within myself during the dark solitude times of the pandemic. Jordan taught me how to use my initial existential depression as a tool to practically pick myself up, be the best person I could be, and begin to help others expecting nothing in return. Both impactful, Jordan far more for me. In a way, it's been an exploration of both the differences of buddhism and christianity, but also how they can work together. I understand Sam doesn't claim to be buddhist, and Jordan just revealed (in his own way) that he's Christian. Appreciate them both.
Sam always sounds profound without being originally profound
Unlike your banal comment here.
@@jc2604 exactly
Same with Peterson
@@johncarroll772 maybe so, but at least for now, Jordan cares about dead kids in basements.
😂
"I think, therefore I Am"- Sam..
I was unaware Jordan and Sam were in a relationship, I hope they can work through their struggles
I have listened and subscribed to Sam for at least 7 years and for a long time he was my go to intellectual for his articulate clarity on this crazy world. But something has shifted in the last couple of years, his podcasts aren't as stimulating as they used to be and I don't consume them as eagerly as I used to. His guests are often safe allies who don't challenge Sam in the ways that some of his past guests did, in particular Jordan Peterson. I really hope we get to see Sam duke it out in conversations with his intellectual rivals like he used to do more regularly. I wonder if we will see him on Joe Rogan again, or publicly converse with Bret Weinstein again.
I'm looking forward to the full chat he had with you Chris! You're doing great work.
TDS That’s what happened. I’m in the same boat as you, I always thought Sam to be a very well thought out dispassionate thinker. But his passion around Trump was so strong it strayed into derangement. It’s hard to look at him, or listen to his opinions the same way after you see this.
Agreed. And now he is boycotting RFK Jr. He doesn't want to give him a platform. It's like he is retreating into a bubble.
@@MrJpmoneypants exactly
He is not as focused on debates anymore
You talk of 'talking to safe' allies in the case of Harris and so I have to ask, what do you think of Peterson not even 'taking calls' from Matt Dillahunty after their talk? Matt refused to get suckered by Peterson's fairy fingers and bogus determinations and now your hero won't talk to him.
I always loved his poise and the respect he showed his opponents, in my opinion that is the professionalism that all fighters should aspire to.
Chris's skill to just sit and listen for long periods of time is commendable. I fell off the sam Harris bandwagon a long time ago with his tds. I guess he really still has it.
tds?
@@MrLegovastrump derangement syndrome
@@MrLegovas trump derangement syndrome. It's kind of the point of the "find bodies of kids in hunters basement and it wouldn't be as bad as trump getting another term" thing he refers to.
The real TDS is not understanding what an utter lunatic Trump is.
@@NoFeckingNamesLeftWhich is what?
Sam makes some of the most ironic statements I've ever heard.
He is consistently illogical with almost every word that comes out of his mouth.
@@firefly9838which claim? How about the claim that Romania and Peterson are in an echo chamber, whilst Sam refuses to speak to anyone who doesn't share his opinion on everything. Hiw about the bit where he regurgitated every establishment anti trump piece of rhetoric and fully embraced the lockdown narrative. And despite being proven wrong on many accounts has never once admitted he was wrong, about anything
@@quillo2747 and dropped a lot of his shit on that interview with Konstantin Kisan --- what a fool he made of himself - he has gone off the deep end
The deterministic universe will ensure I listen to this upcoming podcast, through no free will of my own.
bwahah. you truly are enlightened...just like Sam.
You didn't read the book, did you?
@@jc2604 I've been following Sam's work for over a decade and have read most of his books. In case you couldn't tell, this comment was a facetious take on Sam's stance on free will (which I agree with).
Harris actually criticised Peterson and at the same time didnt do it in a hatefull way, this is a first, everyone else either adores him or loathes him. I hope he can have a confrontational yet friendly conversation with Peterson, it could do so much good.
I first read The End of Faith and Letter to a Christian Nation around 2006, so I’ve been a fan of Sam Harris for a while.
He’s always had somewhat technocratic tendencies, I always had a bit of a feeling he was up in the Ivory Tower looking down at the rest of us. But he’s taken that to the next level in recent years, he’s definitely changed.
Why he puts so much stock in obviously corrupt institutions I don’t know, but it’s hard to listen to him now. I stopped listening to his podcast years ago.
Successful people don't rock the boat. Harris and Peterson both love fascism because it feeds them well. That's their common ground.
I do not believe nor had either promulgated fascism
“obviously corrupt institutions”
Well I really hate to break it to you but that’s currently the best we have. The alternative, right now, to those “obviously corrupt institutions” is a bunch of uneducated, confident busybodies doing “their own research” (read: feeding their biases) to try to answer questions that only experts have the actual foundational tools to attempt to adequately answer. A bunch of morons Googling blog posts and UA-cam videos made by other ignorant-but-confident talking heads isn’t going to get us anywhere
Both Sam, and Jordan is hard not to like very much! Seems both like two really good guys! Could listen to them both for hours.
I first learned of Peterson through his podcast conversation with Sam in 2017. Since then, I have been utterly mystified as to why anyone listens to him, more so as his popularity rose, and even more so as his cognitive faculties have faltered publicly. Peterson’s epistemological foundations were always unsound, and his retreat from any solid position always glaring. If he had helped you, great - but you could find better.
mind recommending someone better than Dr Peterson? I've asked this question probably a hundred times to people that make the exact same claim you just made - and I never get a proper response. I'm guessing because you have a Twitch streamer or something in mind while typing this, and are too ashamed to actually name someone. At least that's what I've started assuming when I see this claim made on Reddit. And please don't say someone like Gnome Chomsky, the guy that wanted to keep food from poor black people during covid for not trusting the government's vax mandates... that guy is off the rails and insane.
Fair enough. Different strokes for different folks. It's what one is looking for that determines these guys' value to others. Peterson is much more of a practical therapist/teacher than an intellectual academic. Yes, they are both technically academics, but Peterson's strengths are rooted in his ability to give people practical advice for improving their lives, regardless of a solid philosophical basis. He's very much a do-what-works kind of person, as most psychologists tend to be. That likely explains why he values Christianity so much. Harris is much more of a traditional philosopher type.
can you explain how "his cognitive faculties have faltered publicly"? I didn't follow him closely, so I am just curious what you're referring to.
@@martymcfly88mph35 "Better" in what way? :D He talks about EVERYTHING and has seriously no clue about ANYTHING. Here is a list of people that are "better":
With regards to politics: Anybody who has ever studies politics or read a newspaper (as opposed to Jordan Peterson)
With regards to sociology: Anybody who has ever read a page of Habermas, Butler, Sassen.
And so on and so on...
The Sam Harris/Jordan Peterson relationship is one of those cases that baffles me - when someone so smart and clear thinking (Harris) admires a crap artist whose thoughts are all muddled nonsense.
Sam looks like hes aged 10 years from about 2 years ago.
He shoot himself in the foot by showing us that the cool kid is basically just a drama queen.
He focked himself with that triggernometry interview and all his illogical rantings - just embarrassing - and he lost a good much respect over that
As per usual I find myself agreeing with Sam Harris and his stand on religion but totally against his politics and with Jordan Peterson I'm against his understanding of religion But agree with his politics this way I end up arguing with everybody
@@beowulf_of_wall_st I get what you mean but surely their worldview is a product of their experiences. I mean they grew up developing their worldview from living. They didn't get their worldview first. I definitely prefer JP to SH from a personality point of view.
Yep exactly. Sam never admits he's wrong which is disturbing
Hahah funny. I end up somewhat similar, though I do think Jordan is becoming a bit rigid and ideological in his politics and I prefer his more narrowly-focused, psychological, meaning-centered lectures (pre fame and all that)
What’s ironic, from what I’m reading, and from my own experience is that Sam actually has helped people get to religious experience which of course he detests.
I started listening to Sam about 7 years ago and thought he was great because I was an atheist who was clearly missing something. I bought 12 Rules for Life around that time, started reading and it mentioned God and I got rid of it because I was a stubborn atheist. About a year later I figured I’d be smart to give it another go and from then on Jordan’s message resonated with me. I would now say I am a Christian, who still sometimes struggles with the concept of God, but I fundamentally disagree with Sam’s overarching critique of religion. I find religion to be inevitable. And to me, the Christian ethic seems to line up with the path to the greatest good. I’m happy to have ran into both of these men.
Sam needs to get on JRE and talk with Rogan and Peterson. Discourse please - no feuds.
He'd get more intelligent debate on the Muppet show, talking to Kermit. Fucking Rogan, proper Bellend
I am so happy you talked to Sam. He has made comments that I agree with the main one here, being a massive overstatement, But i do think Sam is someone motivated to find whats real and reach out and touch it. He's a solid guest and a commendable person despite his faults
Sam Harris one of the biggest disappointments since 2019 ,it's a pity I liked him before Biden payroll .
I started out as a Hitchens fan by watching his debates in the early 2010's, and that's how I came across Sam Harris. I have been a fan of his cool articulate intellect ever since. I discovered Jordan Peterson much later, about 2015, just as he was publishing his Maps and Meanings Lectures on UA-cam and the beginnings of his Bill c-16 issues were taking place. I am big fans of them both, I even remember posting an email to Sam's socials saying something along the lines of "you and Jordan Peterson should have a discussion, about literally any topic, I'm sure it will be fascinating" Both Sam and Jordan had done podcasts with Joe (another podcaster I got turned on to because of Sam, and Graham Hancock) immediately before they had their first chat, which turned out to be a bit of a misfire. As much as they see themselves as different from each other, and they are to be sure, I see them as being very similar too. like they are both trying to say the same thing, but using a different dialect. Sam's background as a neuroscientist gives his ideas a kind of 'outside in' perspective, like he is trying to understand consciousness by studying the mind externally, like trying to study the brain to better understand consciousness and thinking in terms of neurons and brain regions etc. whereas Jordan being a Psychologist seems to come at the same problem from a kind of 'inside out' perspective. ie he trying to study consciousness to better understand the brain, ie the idea of Jungian arc types representing the collective experiences of millions of humans all experiencing the operations of similar brain structures, and experiencing it as collectively shared behaviours and beliefs. Personally I am an atheist, so I interpret Jordan's religious references as a combination of metaphors and philosophical treatises, I actually think that is how Jordan interprets them too, I don't think he is a biblical literalist, though I may be wrong on that. That is where I think some of the disagreement comes from between the two, Sam spent his early online career with Hitch arguing against a literal interpretation of the bible. so when Jordan says the things in the bible are true, he means it, but only as Obi Wan would say, true from a certain point of view. I think they both have a lot to offer the world, they are both fascinating and they both believe in the importance of freedom of speech and respecting facts and science. I also think that they are both a little swayed by their respective echo chambers, but I think they are both able to keep their vision clear for the most part too. I personally would love to see them have another debate, or rather a conversation where neither party was trying to win points, or appeal to their fans, but just listen and learn from each other. I think that would be something to see.
I think you really hit this nail on the head.
"True From a Certain Point of View" is called Mythology, buddy. Therefor, that's not true. It's easily my biggest gripe with Peterson that he thinks that Truth doesn't need to be based off of Facts. That was an infuriating discussion with Sam that completely ruined my opinion of Peterson.
@GoodAvatar-ut5pq Thanks for taking the time to read that whole comment and replying. Personally I think I come in halfway between Peterson and Harris's perspectives. But there is a big difference between perspective based truth and mythology. For example, it is true that light is a wave, it is also true that light is a particle. It is highly likely that there exists a deeper truth that explains light more completly still. It does not follow that light is a myth because it is dependant on the perspective from which it is analysed. I realise that my example might seem a bit specific and not related to the topic, but it highlights my core argument, which is that truth can be dependant on the framework from which it is analysed.
If you’re an arheist you are literally too stupid or havent done enough research.
Mythology is what it's name breaks down into, real or not? But you can hardly watch a movie or talk to someone when what you're interpreting doesn't break down into archetypes. And that's Mythology. I'm not buying religion but I'm not selling that from person to people there are similarities that can be mapped.
I watch a LOT of JBP content and the rare times JBP mentions Harris is when he's pulling up an argument of his.
He should debate the very man that invented MRNA treatments.
I am happy to say I agree with Sam on nearly everything. He describes my positions more eloquently than I ever could.
I never understand what people see in this guy. The way he talks aggravates me and I have never in all these years finished one of his books, an interview or one of his podcasts and felt like he actually said something insightful or useful.
He works well to fall asleep to though 👍
I have watch the full version of "THE PODCAST" that he refers to and I don't understand how anyone has taken anything out of context. I can't see any other way to take it. Personally I think the "Stuck in his own Bubble" characterisation of Jordan Petersen is exactly what Sam Harris's problem is. For all his talk of rationalization and having clear arguments etc and yet I have never seen him clearly express any rational arguement for his comments on that podcast nor justify his borderline ridicule for those he deems are on the "right". I wish podcastors would push him more on this!
Have you listened to the episode of Waking Up where he addresses the comments?
No I haven't. Watched multiple podcast since and twitter responses at the time but really thought they were all poorly done. Do you know which episode, can it be accessed without subscription @@rellify3 ?
@@rellify3 yes I have and it is even more embarrassing and just babble
@@michaelwinter5292 the repair job is worst then the original podcast, comes off as a total crackpot
A very interesting contrast of personalities. Sam compliments Jordan, very classy. Jordan does help people, cannot deny this. 😊
Haven't heard sam in 3-4 years. Looks like he has been working out.😅 Though his face looks like he has aged quite a bit.
I mean if you want to continue liking him do not go and see what he has been saying the past 4 years.
I thought the same exact thing. He looks so much older than the last time I saw him, but he does look quite fit.
True but he looks pretty good for nearing 60 years old
@@__-vu8ioexamples please
Probably been hanging out with Rogan...
Can't wait for the full next Mon.😍😍😍
Perfect summarisation of the world in which Joe, JP and their respective audiences reside in. Thanks Sam keep doing what you're doing.
right to center? that wasnt hard to figure out.
Incorrect.
@@ClydeusMaximus so it was hard to figure out Joe Jp and their respective audiences speak to those in the centre. or on the right to centre more traditionalist. Usually people say incorrect and then explain..
Jordan Peterson knows religion is bs, but he promotes it anyway just to monetize and milk the fools.
must admit Sam lost me a little bit with hunter thing, no amount of "naunce" or "context" will make it right, but he remains one of the best orators/word smiths. One can only marvel how eloquently and deliberate his expansive bouquet and choice of words are
Nah read a book man (any undergrad philosophy book seriously) and you'll realize he's like 50-75th percentile among Analytic Philosophers
Sam is incredibly intelligent, and he can't really process people disagreeing with him. I remember saying on Rogan one time if there is lab made meat on the market, he couldn't understand someone choosing to eat real meat over the lab made stuff. With the Hunter Biden Laptop, he can't process people seeing it differently. Although, very smart dude.
I want to hear more discussions between Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson. I find value in both of their point of view. It's interesting to listen to both angles and flesh out my thinking as a result of the interaction.
JP won’t deal with him again - he’s on a much higher level than Sam these days, and I suspect has fundamentally lost respect for him.
Both Sam and Jordan are important. A person who knows how to filter through information can understand that both don’t necessarily contradict each other, but compliment. Both have impacted my life in a big way. All I’ll say about Jordan is that he amplifies certain topics I don’t find necessary and the truly profound (imo) are not as highlighted and so, I think he can do better in prioritizing information. He could use less air time and a few breaks.
Sam, is probably one of the most excellent communicators I’ve ever come across. That alone has changed the way I talk about pretty much everything in my life. His meditation app saved my life and a few of those around me. He has made me less successful employment wise in the short term, but overall a better human. The world doesn’t revolve around treating others well and unconditional love- and so I’ve suffered a little financially. But otherwise, im doing better, so it’s a decent trade off.
Both are important and not necessarily at odds.
In terms of trust in institutions and the media- he talks vaguely and carefully as he should- but ALOT of work needs to be done in those fields. I don’t think anyone has good enough ideas where to start.
He has so much nerve to use terms like 'echo chamber'.
How come?
@@Arbitrary_Moniker Because he lives in Plato's Cave of subjectivity. Though, he doesn't really recognize himself as a subject. He's a hypocrite.
@@dieselphiend where has he said it doesn't apply to him?
@@dieselphiendis he in the echo chamber here?
@@-morrow He's a very opinionated man. He thinks he's right when in fact we are all wrong.
Yes Sam its always OTHER people who are in an echo chamber. Not you 😂😂 Not the guy that just basically said that as long as his echo cha.. I mean "channels " which are the ones he cares about, agree with him, then he can't possibly be wrong about anything. 😂 Also fantastic job steel manning Jordan and Rogan at the end 😂 I totally didn't yell straw man like 3 times in 30 seconds.
Is this the echo chamber?
Jordan really helped me out a few years back. I discovered him, like many did, when he caught attention for his public resistance of woke ideological nonsense. Then I found his other work like 12 Rules for life, his lectures... Fantastic, gave me a lot to think on.
But his turn to religion of recent years really concerns me, and has somewhat turned me off him. I've seen people say that they used to be atheists until discovering his biblical series, and are now Christians. This is very concerning, considering he does not actually believe in god himself, as he all but admits when pushed, and just has a passion for the literature and an appreciation for the values it presents.
He seems to advocate for belief in this literature being warranted based purely on the (subjective) value and meaning it gives people, and that the only way of finding meaning, and the only way to have a solid moral guidance, is to sign up to this ideology.
He's went from admirably being an oponent of ideology and belief that contradicts reality (Transgenderism, feminism etc.) To fully embracing an ideology.
His slimey use of "Well it depends what you mean by..." and his utter refusal to answer certain questions at all, let alone in a clear manner, is honestly just embarassing to watch.
Have you actually watched the biblical series, though? It's absolutely brilliant.
@@scooterbarr325 As a psychological study of literature and mythology, absolutely. But as a promotion of religion and advocation of literal belief, I take issue with it.
I think the correct way to view Peterson is not as a philosopher but as a therapist. That's why he seems inconsistent: A therapist prescribes many things that might work for someone, even when they don't believe in them for themselves. Harris is much closer to a logically consistent philosopher type than Peterson. But the reason Peterson has had the more extensive reach is because he distills information for the masses better than Harris. That's to say nothing of Harris' incredibly polarizing statements about Trump and COVID-19.
This is concerning to you, and not the nearing 2 billion Muslims?
@@roykeane1922 What kind of false equivalence is that? Of course Islam concerns me, but why does that mean I can't criticise Jordan Peterson?
In fact I'm criticisng him for promoting religion, and though he names Christianity as his spiritual darling, these same criticisms can be applied to his friendliness to Islam.
Sam ‘No amount of child corpses compares to Donald Trump’ Harris
Everyone has blind spots. That's essential to being human. Try to perceive everything without bias, and you risk destroying your ego. No ego means no daily functioning in life. Sam his high functioning in his daily life, because he has protected his ego.
@@thorstenmarquardt7274 What in the world are you talking about?
Sam said that there's nothing on Hunter's laptop which could compare to Trump. Apparently Sam wasn't aware of what exactly was on the laptop, so to say iSam's statement didn't age well from the moment he said it is an understatement
@@pansophia93 Have you personally seen what's on the laptop? I have. And aside from evidence of financial wrong-doing, I saw only videos of him fucking prostitutes. Any attempt to ID someone as underage was unsuccessful.
10:16 Yeah... kinda. It's like his blind spot keeps growing and growing. So strange to have rock solid logic juxtaposed with apologia. He says he understands... but it's getting less and less convincing.
Come on, nobody comes up to Sam Harris crying while telling him he changed their lives.
That’s more of a statement of their respective audiences rather than an indictment on either Harris or Peterson. Peterson has a younger, more impressionable, “lost” audience. There’s nothing but sympathy from me, and I get it. But Harris is for a more optimized adult who isn’t in that adolescent phase, who is seeking a more mature sense of peace and purpose.
@@ethan-scott So we agere, Sam doesn't have the power to help in Any meaningfull way.
@@tommykoed7493 It’s a more mature journey for a mature person. Peterson is for college men who didn’t have a dad figure. Nothing wrong with that.
@@tommykoed7493peterson is helping you to have a healthier ego. Harris is preaching meditation. Meditation is becoming aware of the present moment aside from thinking. Stepping back from your ego. Which leads to insights about the nature of life and reality. Peterson is working on giving you a positive ego. Harris is working on getting you out of ego . Healing yoir mind can lead to crying. But realization through meditation will often lead to laughter , the opposite. Because you realize your problems were imaginary
@@bradley6386well put!!
the color grading in this video is fantastic.
Also, Sam still got it. I don't necessarily agree with every point he makes, but he is difficult it ignore in public discourse.
Sam mixed up Joe's response and Peterson's response. Peterson was the one who still had hope for Sam's comeback.
Finally a comment section that acknowledges that there so much good wisdom to be learned from Sam and Jordan.
@@saviormoney. if you read his books and listened to his podcast and took nothing away then you are a poor learner. The ability to learn from people you disagree with is powerful
@@rezur3kt698 he offers nothing someone else hasn't, without believing in State authoritarianism backed by Science™
Jordan yes, Sam? NO!
Omg I just noticed whenever Sam is hammering home a point his right eyebrow raises and I can’t unsee it 😭
Can’t wait for this. I’ve heard you mention wanting to have him on for years. Proud and not surprised that you made it happen.
Sam, just casually suggesting psychedelics are beneficial to increasing spirituality is such a dangerous, simple minded view on this complex topic. Carl Jung himself stated to tread lightly when taking spirituality shortcuts, yeah it might be positive, but you’re kidding yourself if you dont think there is massive psychological danger for many people without proper preparation and a personality that is profoundly integrated and whole. Do not cheat spirituality or religion.
This is coming from someone who is absolutely fond of psychedelics and their therapeutic use, but Harris… you’re leading an army into something you might not want.
To be fair, his "casual" reference is also backed up by hours and hours of talk on the subject (in other venues), including a section of his "Waking Up" book.
Both Sam Harris and Dr. J.B. Peterson have looked into the abyss for far too long.
can we just talk about how Sam has become an ABSOLUTE UNIT?
Right!!!??? I'm surprised I had to scroll this far down to find a comment on this haha. Dude's jacked 💪
Clickbait title = no split from JP
😂 this was funny on so many levels😂 … also no one’s confused Sam
I want to like Sam, but his authoritarian impulses are too much for me to overcome.
To each their own.
Chris I think you’re doing an excellent job filling that “trustworthy media” gap.
Sam is the most intelligent and rational person I’ve ever listened to.
I implore you to expand your horizons a bit because Sam is clearly a broken man.
@@johnjames2470 Oh yeah, I always take advice from youtubers
@@michaelrivera6989 : You mean UA-camr's like Sam Harris? Why wouldn't you take advice from someone you describe as THE MOST intelligent and rational person you've ever listened to? Sam Harris who recently said on a UA-cam podcast that "Hunter Biden literally could have had the corpses of children in his basement. I would not have cared". Are you also a psychopath whose heros are political hacks that subscribe to delusional ideologies?
Sam got me out of religion ten years ago, Jordan got me back into it recently. I still admire both of them to the fullest of my ability and I understand both of their perspectives in the debate. Hopefully they set up more discussions soon.
Name checks out
@@ethan-scott Very mature.
I don't know where you stand, religiously, but Robert Alter and Gary Rendsburg have made a huge impact on how I approach the bible. It's interesting how many atheist claims and accusations of scripture fall apart when you step out of their mindset and introduce even a little nuance.
@@stever7613 My stance is not well defined. I agree with the atheists in regards to the impossibility of supernatural events and the plethora of factual contradictions of the bible (I'm an engineer after all, so a scientist at heart). And I totally agree that the burden of proof is on the religious, and without any proof then the default stance should be atheism.
But I also agree with Peterson who makes the claim that 1. moral values are fundamentally religious and cannot be scientifically extracted from the world i.e. ethics are deontological rather than consequential and 2. the bible being factually incorrect is irrelevant, as that is outweighed by the archetypal stories it outlines relating to the nature and behaviour of humans, which to Peterson makes the bible "true in the fundamental sense".
I haven't yet bridged the gap between those two. Peterson's statement "I act as IF God exists" seems like it goes somewhere in-between, but there's no basis for it besides the utility it brings, which sounds a bit circular to me.
I appreciate your suggestions and will be sure to check them out.
You're still stuck in their childish, binary, atheism vs. religion paradigm. Both platitudes are false attempts to explain the unknowable.
Accept the mystery.
Find your own moral center.
Be your own example and watch your world change as you grow into it.
All men must die.
You must be reborn.
When you live those words you will see the wisdom.
Both men equally make a difference and are deep thinkers, just because they disagree on things it should not undermine their significance on others. my personal experience, when listening to Jordan Peterson has opened my eyes to the systematic limited beliefs we were programmed to since we were born and forced me to use my critical thinking and question the validity of things we see and hear on mainstream media.
Both men are interesting, because they aren't dumb and they are bold. But mainly both men are good marketers, and that's why we know about them. Neither are better thinkers or more profound than your average college philosophy professor or even well-read taxi driver. It's actually not the depth, uniqueness or even clarity of their propositions that draws us to them, it's their ability to market and appeal to our emotions. Same with Joe Rogan. I just want to put out there that it's important to be aware that the people we are talking about here have as their biggest talent marketing and salesmanship. It's just done in a way that sounds intellectual (more intellectual than it really is). I find it more interesting to listen to either of them not as much because of any brilliance, but to understand what it is that people are lacking or desperate for, for better or for worse. Same with the youtuber making this podcast. No special talent that is greater than their quite good talent = mastering the UA-cam algorithm and triggering people enough to get lots of hits.
I can say that Sam taught me how to think rationally and how to prioritise rationality. It has completely changed the way I see the world and kept me away from religous or cultural feudalism. He brought peace into my life. JP on the other hand gave very basic advice, which I think could be good for someone who hit rockbottom, but not me...
I sincerely think he believes himself objective and consistent, and then he says things like, "contrarian echo chamber."
He's so self assured he misses his oxymoronic, contradictory positions while being dismissive of others pov.
Inam actually more of a Petersen fan than Harris, but whathe says about Rogan etc being in an echo chamber of half truths etc is absolutely spot on here.
I’m not a fan of Sam but it’s good to see him.
'The burden is on us, at this point in history, to find a truly non-sectarian way or telling ourselves a story about what we value and what is possible.' - Sam Harris. This is the fundamental point for me. As much as I respect people of faith.
As an agnostic, and somebody who believes in logic, I think this is palpable nonsense. Firstly it is not a matter for non believers to come up with anything other than to live their one life with minimum suffering and maximum fun. Most atheists understand that - which is why they are not having kids. It is this fact that undermines any claim that atheists have that the burden of defining a better future comes down to them. Atheists are bound to go extinct leaving only the religious to re-populate the world. The future is Amish. A culture that produces 6 kids per couple and retains 90% of them in the belief system will take over America in 200 years and taken over the world shortly after. Atheism doesn't have a future.
You might not like that conclusion but it is the inevitable result of the differentiated rates of reproduction between fundamentalist religion vs atheism and the fact that we know that religious belief is in the genes. Atheism is the best thing that ever happened to religion - and the people at the top of Islam and the Catholic Church already know this - which is why they are trying so hard to convert each other and don't give a damn about atheists.
I respect people of faith too because they are people, period. It’s a bit harder to respect “Faith”, capital F.
This point in history? That has never been done. What you find instead is people like SH who have images of dead children in people's basements that don't bother them in the least compared to the scandal at Bump Univesity.
What I got from this is Sam is jackedddd 💪💪💪💪
When I was a young man it was spellbinding to listen to Sam take 12 minutes to over explain a simple question while saying almost nothing profound or inspiring. If your gonna tease me for that long, there should be a payoff. He sounds so much like the preachers and teachers I grew up with. He is the same wolf wearing a different cloth.
Harris is a brilliant example of how claiming to be rational does not make one so.
Still can't forgive Harris for his blinkered thinking on Trump...
Don't forget, dead babies in a basement is better than Orange Man! Also, don't forget to be a moral person.....or something.
@@MrBannystar that's exactly what I was thinking of, big Triggernometry fan...
@@firefly9838 You're clearly missing a hell of a lot of context, I recommend you watch his interview with Triggernometry.
Also, how you can say he was right on Trump compared to the shiteshow of the Biden Administration is utterly laughable. Trump was far better for The US, and you clearly buy into whatever narrative you're sold.
@@firefly9838 there is no hope for people like you, you don't believe in democracy or the will of the people...
The "I used to like Sam until he got TDS" line is so tired-I know it's difficult to hear for you acolytes of the autocratic, conspiracy-mongering, faux-christian grifter who sought to undermine our democracy, but Sam's take on Trump was dead on.
I love this guy! Literally saved my life. I was not going to get the COVID vaxxx, but he convinced me to do it and I am still alive. Thank you, sir.
😂😂😂😂
🤣🤣🤣
Yeah so am I and I DIDN'T get it!
@@collingwoodartdolls634 Woah! That's lucky. But that won't last. COVID will get you sooner or later. That or not doing everything that Dr. Sam Harris says, even though you have no choice.
Imagine Joe Rogan, one of the dumbest people on the planet, saying he still has hope for Sam Harris, one of the smartest people on the planet. It just makes my brain hurt.
damn saying you “still have hope” for someone is one of the most condescending things I’ve ever heard lmao
I dont hope for any kind of rekindled relationship, unless Sam can somehow get through to Jordan. I dont know how genuine Jordan is in the first place either though.
The new Sam Harris - everyone changed and went a bit mad . . . except me 🙄