In latin america we have Pilar Sordo, she said the same stupid things, but to women, kind of "you will be happier if you just surrender to your husband " 🤦♂️ so I hope no one translate peterson to spanish 🤞
Natural Ice For a Peterson fanboy you don't seem to mind your own undermining of western culture. Let me guess: the dragon of chaos stole the ability for you to puntuate sentences and it is unlike a noble lobster to learn? Wasn't one of the twelve rules: 'communicate clearly'?
"What I want to do it's to make an empirical case for the Bible stories" "Scientist genius" Jordan Peterson in an interview with "journalist genius" Dave Rubin.
I think I came across a PZ Myers video debunking that JP segment. But to anyone with a high school education (in America and I assume in Canada) you know that that is not what the double helix looks like. This is on par with those Christians who got super wet when they found a cell in the body that kind of sort of from a certain angle under the right light if you squint looks like a crucifix: therefore Jesus loves you, donate $20. Also, does this count as Michael going on Chapo...or?
Michael did make a good point about Joe Rogan….I listen to Rogan's podcast and I enjoy it (the guests, the content etc.)…but he does have a very bizarre obsession with gender…like he has deep seeded women issues or he questions his own masculinity perhaps? who knows…but its annoying and I just roll my eyes every time the topic comes up...
delyssandra To bash the whole gender discussion as disgusting does hint to me an insecurity in his masculinity. It seems silly to be upset about transgenders.
Harry Hhhhjtfhn I feel that neither you or I understand enough to speak on this subject. Contra points touches upon those subjects though, give her channel a look perhaps starting with this video: ruclips.net/video/6czRFLs5JQo/видео.html
Well, it helps if we recognize that Joe Rogan is a part of the MMA community. He has witnessed transgender women who participate in MMA dominate cis-gendered women. As a member of the track community, I understand the feelings of people that point out how deeply unfair it is to have transgender women and intersex persons compete against cis-gender women. At the last Olympic games three intersex women dominated the 800m dash on the track because they have natural testosterone levels comparable with men. The competing concerns over fairness in sport and universal participation is very different from where people go to the bathroom.
Harry Hhhhjtfhn , Well that's weird, because I live in the United States and doctors do preform gender reassignment surgery, and as with everywhere else in reality there is also no such thing as "sexual reassignment surgery" in other words, your full of shit. Edit; Oh and fyi your claim that gender dysphoria is bodily disphoria, is literally claiming that someone who thinks that they shouldn't have the male genitalia they have but female genitalia , really just don't like that their dick and balls don't LOOK like a vagina. Dud no one buys your bull, get out your moms basement.
Jordan Peterson sounds like a guy who was bullied a lot as a child or someone who was easily scared. The constant nervousness in his voice is startling.
Don't compare George Carlin to Jordan Peterson or any other right wing or left wing either ,for that matter, asshole. Because Carlin wasn't just angry but right ,about the bullshit around us , plus he was one of the funniest guys who ever lived. No one on the right funny , is there?
I’ve been listening to the Chapo podcast for about three months now but never looked up pictures; that is definitely not what I thought Felix would look like.
I don't understand the fetishness surrounding Peterson. It is obvious that the guy doesn't know anything. On the other hand, people are willing to swallow Trump's BS too.
mymentor young white male aggrievement and their sexual entitlement/frustration and rock bottom standards for what's considered "profound" and "intellectual".
As much as I dislike McCain, they don't call him a hero just because he got shot down, but because the North-Vietnamese were going to let him free in exchange for another prisoner and McCain refused unless they freed his whole group.
Ironically enough the advertisement that played for me before this video was a Prager U commercial in which Jordan Petersen complaining about leftists in academia. Does Prager U target left leaning channels like Majority Report, Secular Talk and TYT? Or are they just buying the ads in bulk for news channels?
ah yes, and there is an underground library full of ancient knowledge under the sphinx. good one. how is this man considered as an intellectual? SPHINX!
You have read 20 books Jung? Dude, don't lie and be honest before yourself. If you would read Jung, Sam Harris approach would be very naive and simplified for you. No, Peterson does both by using Jung, psychology and philosophy (and yes, he does not consider himself spectacular philosopher, just second grade), but in conversation with Harris, Jung the philosopher is the one we have to focus on.
There have been studies done (I think Michael referenced them) that have shown that having extreme wealth alters your brain chemistry, and yes it can turn you into (more of) an asshole. On the flipside, there are studies hat show that money DOES buy happiness, but only up to a certain amount of wealth before it virtually ceases to have an influence on happiness.
This is fascinating. In regards to what they are discussing about having money and it changing your outlook, I view Christopher Hitchens in that way. He reached a point where socialism was no longer of benefit to him so he had to justify a new set of beliefs. And he failed massively.
Which "argument" shall we use against Peterson today, Sam? 1. Inferring completely unrelated motives to someone's rhetoric? 2. Repeating what someone says in a funny voice and acting like you've made a point? 3. Assuming the worst of any argument you just straight up don't understand? 4. Outright lying?
Which bullshit regurgitation of JBPs shall we pillory today Sam. 1. I dunno mike, there are just so many . 2. Come on Sam, se owe it to the world to pick the peanuts out of JPs Turd du Jour. 3. We dont need to be picky , JPs nonsense is so prolific, we just need to pick out a few, the laughs will run on endlessly out of pure , absurd momentum.
it baffles my mind jp cry that there is no diversity of opinions bcoz of the left postmodernists yet postmodernism is literaly about about subjective individual opinions
Rogan constantly says he isn't overly smart, just that he has a good memory and can remember things he reads and hears, so saying he isn't as smart as he thinks he is isn't really a fair statement.
It's yet more Jordan Peterson talking about more topics that he has NO background in with the confidence of someone who knows what they're talking about, despite being criminally ignorant for someone who is TEACHING A CLASS, and having done less research than a teenager reading only the very first paragraph of a wikipedia article of a somewhat related topic. So, you know, Tuesday. Whatever university he works at should fire him for giving education, especially science, history, AND PSYCHOLOGY a bad name.
Yeah this is a weird clip. It's like when late 20s/early 30s guys get together and start talking how much money they made on the stock market or whatever and sounding like retirees. It's like the power of money is so insidious that even self proclaimed socialists unconsciously fall back into these stereotypically American behaviors where they can't help but to subtly let you know how well-off they are financially.
Seriously. He did not have to tell us his annual income. I'm not sure what point he was trying to make or if he had a point to make at all. If he wanted to talk about how income effects social interaction there are plenty of studies he could have used to flesh out his argument. Imagine if the conversation was about penis size and social interaction! "Yeah, I totally know about this. My penis is huge. Nine inches to be exact. Makes me spend all my free time at the gym and playing video games"
Exactly. He also had to throw in the point that he was worthless at school and bad at looking for work. Almost like being born comfortable allows you greater opportunities in life or even grants you chances to fail upwards. Like, being paid 100,000+ dollars a year to podcast is so far from the reality of the lives of most americans, it's unreal. Lots of stuff nowadays to talk about guys, try literally anything else.
The Bible I caught that too. He was literally bragging about being lazy and successful. Not a great look for a progressive show that reports on the intersectional nature of income inequality. I think Michael was trying to tone it down toward the end. The guy was shockingly unaware.
Jordan Peterson is FUCKING NUTS. There is no way in hell the ancient Chinese had the concept of DNA. This is the problem with his feelies approach to everything.
"Everyone should have a dumb thing they like that has something to it." Mine is that I kind of believe the "Early Date Theory" of a mid-second century BC exodus story.
"Russell Gmekin'' has a theory that the pentateuch was only written in the mid second century Bce, he seems to have disproven the "early date ', theories of Judaism I believe Isaac Newton, had some similar ideas, hence so much platonic doctrine in the bible. I BELIEVE HE THOUGHT IT WAS ALEXANDER' THE GAY'S (MANUAL OF DISCIPLINE) Written by agents (scholars) paid by ptolemy Soter, including "Philo of Alexanria". Hence the pagan references to, for example the "logos,"
The money thing is really interesting. I think it's a great point about not needing to rely on others and it making you crazy. There's probably a larger point there about isolation in general making you crazy. Mix "crazy from isolation" with "lots of money" and you get special interest groups doing stuff that seems insane to most of the rest of the population (perhaps). And it makes sense that if you've reached the point of "don't need to rely on others" and instead rely on your money, then you would tend to be FUCKING TERRIFIED of losing any part of your money. I get the impression that particular issue is widely present in America and some of it is just because many of the things that we need to survive are not things we _can_ necessarily get from our own work, or from a community. They may be tied up almost entirely in a corporate pay-for-it system. So there is no choice but to have the money for it and no amount of friends will make much of a difference.
No idea how those students sat there. I would have immediately asked atleast one question. Possibly if they are being litteral, and if they really thought an ancient civilization knew about DNA or something along those lines
The guy who explored this stuff, among others, is Carl Jung, and it is interesting, and it was looked at over 50 years ago, and continues to be looked at, so, ummm, Jordan brings absolutely nothing new to this, but uses it to justify his own peculiarities...
Jordan Peterson is NOT an atheist, not a skeptic! - My rebuttal of anti-atheist arguments ever brought up by Michael Brooks: 1. "So called New atheism is different from atheism" - No. It was atheism, plain and simple. (Also, not a brand!) It was outspoken, vocal, visible atheism that was not hiding in the closet. Maybe you did not like that (analogues to people who "tolerate" gay people as long as they are not "public".) Maybe you just did not like some of the people associated with it (the one`s that arguably got most of the attention.) Other figures are getting ignored by critics like you (P Z Myers, Aron Ra, A C Grayling). I guess because they would ruin your classification of... 2a. "..."new" atheism as right-wing." - (Myers and Aron Ra are clearly on "our" leftist side). Polls show that most atheist are liberals/progressives/leftists. This is getting constantly ignored by people who bash "new" atheism - sorry, but I smell dishonesty and a smearing campaign. 2b. "Atheists are pro-war." - Some atheists are centrists (Democrats) or even right wing Republican voters, no doubt. Some are pro-interventions. You know how many Christians are Conservatives and right-wing? How many are warmongers? Holding atheists to a higher standard just to smear the concept of atheism is an unfair trick, manipulation. 2c. "They jumped on an anti-Muslim bandwagon" - so you think Harris (or to lesser extend, Dawkins) could not be driven by fear, in the slightest? Their harshest comments came in times when Islamic terrorism struck hardest. Maybe a little fear about religiously-driven terrorism is permissible? Also, no religion (including Islam) should be above scrutiny and criticism. 2d. "Internet atheists suck." - Mostly true. Right wing "internet" atheists are also misogynists and many other rather nasty things. Them being anti-women or right-wing is not part of an atheist "credo" (there is none!). Those "internet atheists" are arguably the worst atheism has to offer. Start judging religion by it`s worst proponents! (Oh, wait, that is what outspoken atheists did, and you did not like that...) You see, double standards again, judging atheists harsher than religion. Taking the worst atheists "pars pro toto" but refuse to do so for "theists". 2e. "Jordant Peterson..." - J. PETERSON IS A BELIEVER. NOT AN ATHEIST. NOT A "SKEPTIC". No reason to mention him. 3a. "Atheists are so mean to believers, calling them stupid, criticising them..." - You seem to be against the idea to criticising religion altogether. Which shows that you are biased. Nothing should be above criticism. Whenever something was held above criticism, huge problems arise for society (and peace). Just take the (false) idea to not criticise one`s nation, because of "patriotism" or the fear of "being anti-American". E.g. Chomsky did it anyway, which is good for the US; healthy. Atheism has the same right to criticise religion. It is healthy for society. Necessary for progress. Also, "theists" criticise and insult atheists all the time. Demonise them even! Again you are applying double-standards in favour of religion. 3b. "Religion is not making people into Trump voters or right-wingers" - Fundamentalist Christians (and many other "traditional", practicing Christians) are Trump supporters, and the most "faithful" ones, too. And it is mostly based in their anti-LGBTQ and anti-women`s rights stance that they are supporting him. Which both result from their religion (or at least get reenforced and morally justified by it). So it is their religion that turns them to Trump, not e.g. economics. (They expect him to "give them" Roe v Wade - and that will be only the start. Their wish-list is long.) So, yes, believing in "God" in the "good old way" (which did not get softened up under atheist influence into a pick-and chose, make-your-own religiosity) DOES LEAD theists to become right-wing! (Educate yourself of e.g. Francoist Spain, Portugal`s Salazar dictatorship or just Jerry Falwell sr. "Silent Majority" and their alliance with Reagan.) Also, look at Jair Bolsonaro, arguably a fascist: He is the presidential candidate of the religious people! His campaign slogan is: "Brasil above everything. GOD ABOVE EVERYBODY." Did Michael "forget" to mention that? Pity. Religion with its dismissal of critical and independent thinking, with its strict rules, dogmas and absolutist ideas about e.g. gender roles and hierarchies, make people susceptible for right-wing ideas and submissive towards authoritarianism and "strong men" leaders. The eagerness of religious people to influence education (home schooling being the most drastic way) by changing the curriculum to fit their world-view (e.g. removal of sex education, evolution, history getting distorted) is indicative for their approval of early "brainwashing" of children. (Not only their own, but by default everyone who is attending those schools!) It is not critical citizens that they want to "forge" in schools, but mouthpieces and "fighters" for "traditional" ideologies (that can grow to full blown fascism, when the time is ripe). People who grew up under these circumstances rarely break out of their "mould" and will indoctrinate their children, too. A vicious cycle. 3c. "Atheists are singling out believers/theists for criticism" - You are singling out! You single out (New) atheism for criticism and "theism" (religion) for special privilege. Clarification: I am not part of any "movement", nor am I a "fan" of certain figures. I am clearly for being an outspoken, critical atheist, though. I see that as my duty: "Speak truth to power."
I’m categorically not avJP fan, but I can’t stand MB and the way he continually jabs and prods and makes fun of people in a class clown way. It’s so purile and annoying!
As a writer/artist I see Jordan Peterson as an advocate for New Sincerity, which is important for a lot of people on the internet to be exposed to due to something identified early in the zeitgeist by Nathan Poe: WIthout an obvious indication (winky face, WrItInG lIkE tHiS) irony/sarcasm is indistinguishable from genuine views. His work is important on some level because there's a lot of awful shit online, and if people on the schizotypal spectrum (such as myself) get into certain frames of thinking then they can suffer a negative feedback loop of hypersalience through confirmation bias, or, even worse, aberrant salience. Peterson's work seems, to me, to be token a desire to give angry young men a purpose beyond ruminating online.
I love how he says "it's really complicated to explain why" a double helix with male and female figures attached is a representation of DNA, when any idiot who's aware of the shape and function of DNA can easily figure out why. This is his whole schtick, though. He says something super obvious, and then acts as though it's a profound statement that only the most clever people can grasp.
It' snakes fucking. They do that in austrailia and everywhere else, plople are somehow fascinated by that, they draw it and work it into their culture. Thats it...
It’s interesting, but it’s absurd to say that it’s a representation of DNA, or that we have a subconscious knowledge of DNA. A RUclipsr called Genetically Modified Skeptic does a pretty good, though not perfect, “takedown” of this DNA/double helix in ancient cultures thing.. Look, I’m all for a connection to the “luminous”, “transcendent”, or “spiritual” (perhaps for a lack of better terms), but you can actually have all that without the “woo”, or whatever nonsense. I know that’s a Sam Harris thing, but that’s one thing he actually gets right imo. Some of the most beautiful “truths” that I’ve gotten from the universe, sans formal education, came from experiences I’ve had with psychedelic drugs, MDMA, and even edible marijuana occasionally. I’m a person who thinks logic and reason are extremely important, bc they’re a part of the basis of critical thinking, and we absolutely need as much critical thinking skills on the left as we can get. Also, I’m still very inspired by Marx’s religious critique, and think it’s absolutely essential for the long term survival of humanity, that we do away with fundamentalist interpretations of religion (particularly the fundamentalist style Abrahamic religions). You can have your sacred and/or spiritual beliefs, cool, so do I, but you don’t need to buy into anything that’s completely absurd to do so.. Idk, maybe I don’t actually disagree with Michael, but I’ve always gotten the vibe that I’m really disconnected from his views on the mystical and/or religious, which I think the left can and should be respectful of, but also be cautious about. Belief in a cosmic tyrant is antithetical to the leftist project, and I’m sorry, but fundamentalist Abrahamic religion, and some other faiths, literally cannot be a part of the leftist future we need. ✌🏼
Derek Watts it was the DNA thing. Even if you disagree that what they meant. But then he was supposed to say something dumb but instead they talked about other shit for 10 minutes.
In latin america we have Pilar Sordo, she said the same stupid things, but to women, kind of "you will be happier if you just surrender to your husband " 🤦♂️ so I hope no one translate peterson to spanish 🤞
Lucas Gonzalo salazar Fuck
Lucas Gonzalo salazar very hy bhaff
Incels everywhere.. We are surrounded, let's give them women, they won't know what to do with them anyway.
uh, the women you give will be armed, lol.
juan gomez, uuhhhhh
Where do I pick up my womyns??
juan gomez the incels are you soy boy bitches you fucks can't even get laid in a morgue.
Natural Ice For a Peterson fanboy you don't seem to mind your own undermining of western culture. Let me guess: the dragon of chaos stole the ability for you to puntuate sentences and it is unlike a noble lobster to learn?
Wasn't one of the twelve rules: 'communicate clearly'?
It's good to have a label for everyone. Without the internet I never would know what that is.
Brace yourselves! The incels cometh!
LOL, The Incel Cometh , that'll be a play soon
Cometh into socks before typing angry rants about wymen.
Epic! B)
The incels have NOTHING to do with all this!
Peterson is the Tony Robbins of the deplorables
fakeItRight lamest tony Robbins ever
I always say Deepak Chopra
Despicably Irascible Rapscallion How about "Deepsteak Choker"
Green Wave 2018 Deplorables is NOT a compliment. And Trump won the election by appealing to conspiracy wielding simpletons.
I actually love Tony Robbins and take him with a grain of salt (never will go to a seminar, got PP2 for Free, bought two books but they were cheap).
Lol, Peterson's incels are already here.
do you see Peterson incels' as an enemy?
no just dorks
you seem like very kind decent people
::circus music plays::
looool MVP comment. Honestly, his radicalization of these men is not going to be pretty for the rest of us.
When I wear a collared shirt, I keep one button unbuttoned, two at the most. My mans on the left got his whole shirt unbuttoned.
Hairy homie feeling hella sexy! Lmao! Smh...put a shirt on your...shirt Shyt!
Felix can get it tho 😏😏
I wanna hear his "really complicated explanation" so bad
Re-f#%king-tweeeeet lol
came for the peterson roast, stayed for the observations about how wealth can lead to sociopathy
also we live in a society bottom text
Same
*looks at the comment section*
_Send innnn the clooowwwnnnss_
loved the "seed blunt" reference. I know the guy he's talking about myannnnnnn!
Indeed, the hysterical Peterson critics will be along soon. They're driven to suicidal fits by any reference to Peterson.
I love you Krusty...
QUIET!
@@pendejo6466 I'm always amazed by the macho, pick yourself up by your bootstraps, type of crap, coming from effeminate twat-waffles like Peterson.
"What I want to do it's to make an empirical case for the Bible stories" "Scientist genius" Jordan Peterson in an interview with "journalist genius" Dave Rubin.
have you watch it? DO you think that he wanted to proof that Bible is literally true?
The reason so many cultures have representations of 2 entwine serpents is because they had seen snakes fuck, seriously.
And thanks for being honest, Felix, you nailed it. Being paid propagandist really makes you disconnect from actual people's problems and views.
I think I came across a PZ Myers video debunking that JP segment. But to anyone with a high school education (in America and I assume in Canada) you know that that is not what the double helix looks like. This is on par with those Christians who got super wet when they found a cell in the body that kind of sort of from a certain angle under the right light if you squint looks like a crucifix: therefore Jesus loves you, donate $20.
Also, does this count as Michael going on Chapo...or?
Harry Stoddard
ruclips.net/video/QrAmjFEVk8Q/видео.html
I think it was this video....
That's the one. That must have also been where I got the comparison to laminin. Funny how the brain works.
bingo thats what i was thinking too. a helix is actually a cylindrical long thread, but these are 2 braids crossing each other
Michael did make a good point about Joe Rogan….I listen to Rogan's podcast and I enjoy it (the guests, the content etc.)…but he does have a very bizarre obsession with gender…like he has deep seeded women issues or he questions his own masculinity perhaps? who knows…but its annoying and I just roll my eyes every time the topic comes up...
delyssandra To bash the whole gender discussion as disgusting does hint to me an insecurity in his masculinity. It seems silly to be upset about transgenders.
Harry Hhhhjtfhn I feel that neither you or I understand enough to speak on this subject. Contra points touches upon those subjects though, give her channel a look perhaps starting with this video:
ruclips.net/video/6czRFLs5JQo/видео.html
Well, it helps if we recognize that Joe Rogan is a part of the MMA community. He has witnessed transgender women who participate in MMA dominate cis-gendered women. As a member of the track community, I understand the feelings of people that point out how deeply unfair it is to have transgender women and intersex persons compete against cis-gender women. At the last Olympic games three intersex women dominated the 800m dash on the track because they have natural testosterone levels comparable with men. The competing concerns over fairness in sport and universal participation is very different from where people go to the bathroom.
Harry Hhhhjtfhn ,That's not what the DSM says they have, and the recommended treatment for sexual disnorphia, is gender reassignment surgery.
Harry Hhhhjtfhn
, Well that's weird, because I live in the United States and doctors do preform gender reassignment surgery, and as with everywhere else in reality there is also no such thing as "sexual reassignment surgery" in other words, your full of shit.
Edit; Oh and fyi your claim that gender dysphoria is bodily disphoria, is literally claiming that someone who thinks that they shouldn't have the male genitalia they have but female genitalia , really just don't like that their dick and balls don't LOOK like a vagina. Dud no one buys your bull, get out your moms basement.
Jordan Peterson sounds like a guy who was bullied a lot as a child or someone who was easily scared. The constant nervousness in his voice is startling.
iriear why criticise someone for that?
Nah, he just sounds like a bitter, angry old man. Think George Carlin, but without the killer sense of humour.
Don't compare George Carlin to Jordan Peterson or any other right wing or left wing either ,for that matter, asshole. Because Carlin wasn't just angry but right ,about the bullshit around us , plus he was one of the funniest guys who ever lived. No one on the right funny , is there?
Yeah he def got beat up a lot in high school
Tom, it was not a criticism, it was just an observation.
I’ve been listening to the Chapo podcast for about three months now but never looked up pictures; that is definitely not what I thought Felix would look like.
Original
Lmao, I can’t discern between Jordan Peterson and Mikey Brooks’ mocking imitation of Jordan Peterson!
Rip Michael Brooks
I like Felix Biederman! What he said (in that show, not the clip) about money`s bad influence on character was pure gold.
Michael's Jordon Peterson impersonation is so spot on, cracks me up every time!
I don't understand the fetishness surrounding Peterson. It is obvious that the guy doesn't know anything. On the other hand, people are willing to swallow Trump's BS too.
That was nice of Michael to give his shirt to Felix while he's waiting for his laundry to finish.
How did such a mediocrity gain such a huge media presence?
mymentor young white male aggrievement and their sexual entitlement/frustration and rock bottom standards for what's considered "profound" and "intellectual".
basic math
As much as I dislike McCain, they don't call him a hero just because he got shot down, but because the North-Vietnamese were going to let him free in exchange for another prisoner and McCain refused unless they freed his whole group.
Incels....incoming!!!!
You must be their leader.
i think jordan peterson is just the owner of a lonely heart
Much better than an owner of a broken heart.
A lonely heart can be fixed, a broken heart is at best debatable.
Ironically enough the advertisement that played for me before this video was a Prager U commercial in which Jordan Petersen complaining about leftists in academia. Does Prager U target left leaning channels like Majority Report, Secular Talk and TYT? Or are they just buying the ads in bulk for news channels?
You can’t criticize him until you understand him. You can’t understand him until you understand Carl jung.
ah yes, and there is an underground library full of ancient knowledge under the sphinx.
good one. how is this man considered as an intellectual? SPHINX!
Most superstition comes down to the human mind's inability to process coincidence.
Why is he paid to teach Jungian pseudoscience?
Jung and science? Not philosophy?
@@pioterhejdysz868 Not sure what you're asking.
Well, think of Jung more as a philosopher not scientist. Also, read him first, which I'm 100% sure you did not.
@@pioterhejdysz868 I did. Peterson teaches his work as psychology btw.
You have read 20 books Jung? Dude, don't lie and be honest before yourself. If you would read Jung, Sam Harris approach would be very naive and simplified for you. No, Peterson does both by using Jung, psychology and philosophy (and yes, he does not consider himself spectacular philosopher, just second grade), but in conversation with Harris, Jung the philosopher is the one we have to focus on.
Who the fuck gave this man his Doctorates...I feel like the University should give a public apology for recognizing this man
Take a drink every time someone says "Like"
You first m8. I might even call the ambulance.
I wish Felix was like 15 years older. What a sweetie
12 more years to go..
“Why do we need some arbitrary sacrifice to enjoy our mellow dramatic old men”
FYI, ,'melodramatic' is the word you're searching for.
You're welcome!
So this is what happens after the Alpha males leave the room.
There have been studies done (I think Michael referenced them) that have shown that having extreme wealth alters your brain chemistry, and yes it can turn you into (more of) an asshole.
On the flipside, there are studies hat show that money DOES buy happiness, but only up to a certain amount of wealth before it virtually ceases to have an influence on happiness.
This is fascinating. In regards to what they are discussing about having money and it changing your outlook, I view Christopher Hitchens in that way. He reached a point where socialism was no longer of benefit to him so he had to justify a new set of beliefs. And he failed massively.
Nice Prager U Ad right before the vid, with none other than the subject of the video himself yabbering. Lol surreal.
“Bitches be trifling” is his comedy catchphrase now! Ha ha! 😆
When the comments are split between a stoner echo chamber and a misrepresentive cult following, what a mess
Jordan Peterson brings in the views
His milkshake brings the incels to the yard.
They found out how to monetize Jordan Peterson.
(It'll end soon and Peterson will fall into obscurity).
Bring the views in a radio show. It makes sense to an "Christian atheists JP fanboys".
juan gomez I'm confused, is this not RUclips?
Not an incel, not a fan of Harris, but I disagree that everyone needs to believe in woo
“Cause Bs be trifling” 😂🤣😂
335 people are incels
Which "argument" shall we use against Peterson today, Sam?
1. Inferring completely unrelated motives to someone's rhetoric?
2. Repeating what someone says in a funny voice and acting like you've made a point?
3. Assuming the worst of any argument you just straight up don't understand?
4. Outright lying?
Which bullshit regurgitation of JBPs shall we pillory today Sam.
1. I dunno mike, there are just so many .
2. Come on Sam, se owe it to the world to pick the peanuts out of JPs
Turd du Jour.
3. We dont need to be picky , JPs nonsense is so prolific, we just need to pick out a few, the laughs will run on endlessly out of pure , absurd momentum.
it baffles my mind jp cry that there is no diversity of opinions bcoz of the left postmodernists yet postmodernism is literaly about about subjective individual opinions
😂 OMG, the way you guys are doing JP's voice... 😂 X[] hehehe...
I found out who his voice is like: that old man on family guy, Mr. Herbert
I wish Michael Brooks workedat my job, we'd have the best conversations. Get an IT certification.
Rip Michael Brooks
Execute the rich and take their wealth
I love that Felix doesn't drink!!!
Rogan constantly says he isn't overly smart, just that he has a good memory and can remember things he reads and hears, so saying he isn't as smart as he thinks he is isn't really a fair statement.
It's yet more Jordan Peterson talking about more topics that he has NO background in with the confidence of someone who knows what they're talking about, despite being criminally ignorant for someone who is TEACHING A CLASS, and having done less research than a teenager reading only the very first paragraph of a wikipedia article of a somewhat related topic. So, you know, Tuesday. Whatever university he works at should fire him for giving education, especially science, history, AND PSYCHOLOGY a bad name.
I can't understand why these guys can't just replace John Oliver and Trevor Noah. They are just satire. NO facts. lol
"oh no, I said something cool, now I must come up wth some even crazier, more irrational shit."
Ancient Aliens did this much better than Jordan Peterson.
I do not get Jordan Peterson. I have tried, I have tried. He talks reactionary conservative crap, but wrapped up in pseudo religious psychobabble.
I'll be the first to admit I'm a MR fan boy, but I'll take Alex Jones or D-Man make fun of session over Peterson any day.
RIP Michael Brooks 🥺 Miss that guy
Ugh! This segment totally devolved into a humble brag from Bierderman.
Yeah this is a weird clip. It's like when late 20s/early 30s guys get together and start talking how much money they made on the stock market or whatever and sounding like retirees. It's like the power of money is so insidious that even self proclaimed socialists unconsciously fall back into these stereotypically American behaviors where they can't help but to subtly let you know how well-off they are financially.
Seriously. He did not have to tell us his annual income. I'm not sure what point he was trying to make or if he had a point to make at all. If he wanted to talk about how income effects social interaction there are plenty of studies he could have used to flesh out his argument. Imagine if the conversation was about penis size and social interaction!
"Yeah, I totally know about this. My penis is huge. Nine inches to be exact. Makes me spend all my free time at the gym and playing video games"
Exactly. He also had to throw in the point that he was worthless at school and bad at looking for work. Almost like being born comfortable allows you greater opportunities in life or even grants you chances to fail upwards. Like, being paid 100,000+ dollars a year to podcast is so far from the reality of the lives of most americans, it's unreal. Lots of stuff nowadays to talk about guys, try literally anything else.
The Bible I caught that too. He was literally bragging about being lazy and successful. Not a great look for a progressive show that reports on the intersectional nature of income inequality. I think Michael was trying to tone it down toward the end. The guy was shockingly unaware.
My life is just fine without superstition.
Does this guy think 110k/year is a lot of money? Try having a couple kids, that 110k will go away real fast
I like that Felix hasn't let money ruin him.
Jordan Peterson is FUCKING NUTS. There is no way in hell the ancient Chinese had the concept of DNA. This is the problem with his feelies approach to everything.
Lmfao at the seed blunt 😂😂😂😂
great video. love you guys
"Everyone should have a dumb thing they like that has something to it." Mine is that I kind of believe the "Early Date Theory" of a mid-second century BC exodus story.
"Russell Gmekin'' has a theory that the pentateuch was only written in the mid second century Bce, he seems to have disproven the "early date ', theories of Judaism I believe Isaac Newton, had some similar ideas, hence so much platonic doctrine in the bible.
I BELIEVE HE THOUGHT IT WAS ALEXANDER' THE GAY'S (MANUAL OF DISCIPLINE)
Written by agents (scholars) paid by ptolemy Soter, including "Philo of Alexanria". Hence the pagan references to, for example the "logos,"
Good segment
The money thing is really interesting. I think it's a great point about not needing to rely on others and it making you crazy. There's probably a larger point there about isolation in general making you crazy. Mix "crazy from isolation" with "lots of money" and you get special interest groups doing stuff that seems insane to most of the rest of the population (perhaps). And it makes sense that if you've reached the point of "don't need to rely on others" and instead rely on your money, then you would tend to be FUCKING TERRIFIED of losing any part of your money. I get the impression that particular issue is widely present in America and some of it is just because many of the things that we need to survive are not things we _can_ necessarily get from our own work, or from a community. They may be tied up almost entirely in a corporate pay-for-it system. So there is no choice but to have the money for it and no amount of friends will make much of a difference.
No idea how those students sat there. I would have immediately asked atleast one question. Possibly if they are being litteral, and if they really thought an ancient civilization knew about DNA or something along those lines
The guy who explored this stuff, among others, is Carl Jung, and it is interesting, and it was looked at over 50 years ago, and continues to be looked at, so, ummm, Jordan brings absolutely nothing new to this, but uses it to justify his own peculiarities...
good to know felix looks as obnoxious as he sounds
Jordan Peterson is NOT an atheist, not a skeptic! - My rebuttal of anti-atheist arguments ever brought up by Michael Brooks: 1. "So called New atheism is different from atheism" - No. It was atheism, plain and simple. (Also, not a brand!) It was outspoken, vocal, visible atheism that was not hiding in the closet. Maybe you did not like that (analogues to people who "tolerate" gay people as long as they are not "public".) Maybe you just did not like some of the people associated with it (the one`s that arguably got most of the attention.) Other figures are getting ignored by critics like you (P Z Myers, Aron Ra, A C Grayling). I guess because they would ruin your classification of...
2a. "..."new" atheism as right-wing." - (Myers and Aron Ra are clearly on "our" leftist side). Polls show that most atheist are liberals/progressives/leftists. This is getting constantly ignored by people who bash "new" atheism - sorry, but I smell dishonesty and a smearing campaign.
2b. "Atheists are pro-war." - Some atheists are centrists (Democrats) or even right wing Republican voters, no doubt. Some are pro-interventions. You know how many Christians are Conservatives and right-wing? How many are warmongers? Holding atheists to a higher standard just to smear the concept of atheism is an unfair trick, manipulation.
2c. "They jumped on an anti-Muslim bandwagon" - so you think Harris (or to lesser extend, Dawkins) could not be driven by fear, in the slightest? Their harshest comments came in times when Islamic terrorism struck hardest. Maybe a little fear about religiously-driven terrorism is permissible? Also, no religion (including Islam) should be above scrutiny and criticism.
2d. "Internet atheists suck." - Mostly true. Right wing "internet" atheists are also misogynists and many other rather nasty things. Them being anti-women or right-wing is not part of an atheist "credo" (there is none!).
Those "internet atheists" are arguably the worst atheism has to offer. Start judging religion by it`s worst proponents! (Oh, wait, that is what outspoken atheists did, and you did not like that...) You see, double standards again, judging atheists harsher than religion. Taking the worst atheists "pars pro toto" but refuse to do so for "theists".
2e. "Jordant Peterson..." - J. PETERSON IS A BELIEVER. NOT AN ATHEIST. NOT A "SKEPTIC". No reason to mention him.
3a. "Atheists are so mean to believers, calling them stupid, criticising them..." - You seem to be against the idea to criticising religion altogether. Which shows that you are biased. Nothing should be above criticism. Whenever something was held above criticism, huge problems arise for society (and peace). Just take the (false) idea to not criticise one`s nation, because of "patriotism" or the fear of "being anti-American". E.g. Chomsky did it anyway, which is good for the US; healthy. Atheism has the same right to criticise religion. It is healthy for society. Necessary for progress.
Also, "theists" criticise and insult atheists all the time. Demonise them even! Again you are applying double-standards in favour of religion.
3b. "Religion is not making people into Trump voters or right-wingers" - Fundamentalist Christians (and many other "traditional", practicing Christians) are Trump supporters, and the most "faithful" ones, too. And it is mostly based in their anti-LGBTQ and anti-women`s rights stance that they are supporting him. Which both result from their religion (or at least get reenforced and morally justified by it). So it is their religion that turns them to Trump, not e.g. economics. (They expect him to "give them" Roe v Wade - and that will be only the start. Their wish-list is long.) So, yes, believing in "God" in the "good old way" (which did not get softened up under atheist influence into a pick-and chose, make-your-own religiosity) DOES LEAD theists to become right-wing! (Educate yourself of e.g. Francoist Spain, Portugal`s Salazar dictatorship or just Jerry Falwell sr. "Silent Majority" and their alliance with Reagan.)
Also, look at Jair Bolsonaro, arguably a fascist: He is the presidential candidate of the religious people! His campaign slogan is: "Brasil above everything. GOD ABOVE EVERYBODY." Did Michael "forget" to mention that? Pity.
Religion with its dismissal of critical and independent thinking, with its strict rules, dogmas and absolutist ideas about e.g. gender roles and hierarchies, make people susceptible for right-wing ideas and submissive towards authoritarianism and "strong men" leaders.
The eagerness of religious people to influence education (home schooling being the most drastic way) by changing the curriculum to fit their world-view (e.g. removal of sex education, evolution, history getting distorted) is indicative for their approval of early "brainwashing" of children. (Not only their own, but by default everyone who is attending those schools!)
It is not critical citizens that they want to "forge" in schools, but mouthpieces and "fighters" for "traditional" ideologies (that can grow to full blown fascism, when the time is ripe). People who grew up under these circumstances rarely break out of their "mould" and will indoctrinate their children, too. A vicious cycle.
3c. "Atheists are singling out believers/theists for criticism" - You are singling out! You single out (New) atheism for criticism and "theism" (religion) for special privilege.
Clarification: I am not part of any "movement", nor am I a "fan" of certain figures. I am clearly for being an outspoken, critical atheist, though. I see that as my duty: "Speak truth to power."
I’m categorically not avJP fan, but I can’t stand MB and the way he continually jabs and prods and makes fun of people in a class clown way. It’s so purile and annoying!
12:15 "Throw money at the problem."
08:56 This aged like a fine wine ✨💫
Yooo is that intro music clip from K-OS, The Mirror?
"Woo agnostic" haha that is some tryhard contrarianism.
peterson fan girls incoming
Wow these guys literally have no clue what they're talking about.
As a writer/artist I see Jordan Peterson as an advocate for New Sincerity, which is important for a lot of people on the internet to be exposed to due to something identified early in the zeitgeist by Nathan Poe: WIthout an obvious indication (winky face, WrItInG lIkE tHiS) irony/sarcasm is indistinguishable from genuine views.
His work is important on some level because there's a lot of awful shit online, and if people on the schizotypal spectrum (such as myself) get into certain frames of thinking then they can suffer a negative feedback loop of hypersalience through confirmation bias, or, even worse, aberrant salience. Peterson's work seems, to me, to be token a desire to give angry young men a purpose beyond ruminating online.
Bravo, keep it coming.
Lol that is so dumb, I didn't even think JP was THAT crazy.
Just listening, it sounds like Archer ripping on Jordie Porgie.
I love how he says "it's really complicated to explain why" a double helix with male and female figures attached is a representation of DNA, when any idiot who's aware of the shape and function of DNA can easily figure out why.
This is his whole schtick, though. He says something super obvious, and then acts as though it's a profound statement that only the most clever people can grasp.
Man I’ll miss the Michael Brooks X Felix Biederman moments
Felix keeps crackin me up.
You Guys makin fun of the Lobsterking is precious
Seriously, it's not that deep.
You are so right!
what was the point of this?
Do not cede science to "Sam Harris bullshit."
Rogan is pretty sus. Youre right michael
Omg I would save so much money and lose so much weight if I decided to cut booze
It' snakes fucking. They do that in austrailia and everywhere else, plople are somehow fascinated by that, they draw it and work it into their culture. Thats it...
It’s interesting, but it’s absurd to say that it’s a representation of DNA, or that we have a subconscious knowledge of DNA. A RUclipsr called Genetically Modified Skeptic does a pretty good, though not perfect, “takedown” of this DNA/double helix in ancient cultures thing..
Look, I’m all for a connection to the “luminous”, “transcendent”, or “spiritual” (perhaps for a lack of better terms), but you can actually have all that without the “woo”, or whatever nonsense. I know that’s a Sam Harris thing, but that’s one thing he actually gets right imo. Some of the most beautiful “truths” that I’ve gotten from the universe, sans formal education, came from experiences I’ve had with psychedelic drugs, MDMA, and even edible marijuana occasionally.
I’m a person who thinks logic and reason are extremely important, bc they’re a part of the basis of critical thinking, and we absolutely need as much critical thinking skills on the left as we can get. Also, I’m still very inspired by Marx’s religious critique, and think it’s absolutely essential for the long term survival of humanity, that we do away with fundamentalist interpretations of religion (particularly the fundamentalist style Abrahamic religions). You can have your sacred and/or spiritual beliefs, cool, so do I, but you don’t need to buy into anything that’s completely absurd to do so..
Idk, maybe I don’t actually disagree with Michael, but I’ve always gotten the vibe that I’m really disconnected from his views on the mystical and/or religious, which I think the left can and should be respectful of, but also be cautious about. Belief in a cosmic tyrant is antithetical to the leftist project, and I’m sorry, but fundamentalist Abrahamic religion, and some other faiths, literally cannot be a part of the leftist future we need. ✌🏼
Peterson ain't shit.
Do these guys actually do anything besides criticise things?
We have a new president
I kept waiting for the "falls back into lameness" part but it never came
I kept waiting for the part that was supposed to be cool.
Derek Watts it was the DNA thing. Even if you disagree that what they meant. But then he was supposed to say something dumb but instead they talked about other shit for 10 minutes.
I agree
Liked only for the seed blunt joke. So true XD
A Canadian Larry Laffer? The American one is likeable, at least.