Jordan Peterson Refuses to Debate Matt Dillahunty
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 сен 2023
- 🌱LINKTREE: linktr.ee/deepdrinks Original Video: ruclips.net/user/liveA6jH_gV3...
Pangburn Video: • Does God Exist? Jordan...
👉PATREON: / deepdrinks
🎧PODCAST: podfollow.com/deep-drinks
🐦TWITTER: / deepdrinkspod
📷INSTAGRAM: / deepdrinkspodcast
😃FB GROUP: / deepdrinks
💬DISCORD: / discord
📺DAVID'S CHANNEL: / @postfaith
👉 Email (business enquiries): david@deepdrinks.com
📚Recommended Reading (affiliate links):
amzn.to/45LJxFT
🎥Equipment I Use (affiliate links):
amzn.to/42vM2cy
MVP COURSES (support this channel by signing up for a Mythvision Podcast Course using one of the following affiliate links)
📜Real Israelite Religions: Facts on the Ground and Propaganda in the Bible with Dr. Kipp Davis: deepdrinks--pursuit4knowledge...
📜Reading the Gospels with One Eye on Greek Poetry with Dennis R. MacDonald and Derek Lambert: deepdrinks--pursuit4knowledge...
📜New Testament Studies for Everyone with Dr. Richard Carrier: deepdrinks--pursuit4knowledge...
📜Creating Jesus: Why Mark’s Gospel Was Forgotten with Dr. James D. Tabor:
deepdrinks--pursuit4knowledge...
📜The Quest For The Historical Jesus with Professor Dale C. Allison Jr., PhD:
deepdrinks--pursuit4knowledge...
📜The Ancient Greek Mysteries & Christianity with Dr. M. David Litwa:
deepdrinks--pursuit4knowledge...
#podcast #deepdrinks
Disclaimer: Deep Drinks Podcast (DDP) does not endorse the views or statements of any guest. DDP strives for deep conversations about deep topics, this includes harmful ideologies discussed responsibly. FULL STATEMENT www.deepdrinks.com/disclaimer
Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
Want to create live streams like this? Check out StreamYard: streamyard.com/pal/d/63831825...
Want to create live streams like this? Check out StreamYard: streamyard.com/pal/d/63831825... 
Развлечения
Watch the full interview here: ruclips.net/user/liveA6jH_gV3rZo?si=b4cWGyvuzfBXmdJg
In my amateur perspective of intellectuals such as Jordan Peterson and Matt Dillahunty, I find a fascinating juxtaposition. Peterson, arguably, exhibits tendencies of an agnostic, while simultaneously aligning with cultural Christianity. Notwithstanding this, he undeniably enriches the intellectual milieu. I concur with Peterson's perspective that while rationality holds significant value in understanding and navigating the intricacies of human existence, it alone may not be the panacea. Indeed, enhanced rationality can assist us, but it might be insufficient to transcend the inherent challenges posed by our hormonal imbalances and evolved instincts. On an individual plane, rationality might proffer potential avenues for growth; however, at the collective level, our deeply ingrained tribal instincts often loom large, influencing our actions and beliefs.
Meanwhile, I resonate with the sentiments of Dillahunty and Sam Harris, suggesting that superstitions and beliefs in the supernatural bear the vestiges of a more primitive era. Peter Boghossian's perspective resonates with me as well; he posits that a proclivity towards religious, archetypal cognition is deeply entrenched within us. This evolutionary inclination towards the mystical might prove challenging to transcend in the foreseeable future, prompting introspection on whether we should even attempt to overcome it.
On a personal note, my philosophical stance leans towards agnostic atheism. I am skeptical of humanly articulated conceptions of divinity, yet remain ambivalent regarding the potential existence of a supernatural entity beyond our comprehension. My conviction rests on the belief that consciousness concludes with mortality. However, an inherent, perhaps evolutionarily-acquired hope, allows me to retain a touch of wonder and openness to the vast unknown - a sentiment I find rationally justifiable in its own right.
Matt was rude to Jordan in their discussion. There is no possible way to say that Matt was overly polite to him. Brown nosing isn't attractive.
@@patrickbarnes9874 Where was he rude, please offer a timestamp
@@IIIJTI tend to side more with Jordan. Mainly because when you break both arguments down, they are both based in concepts. The real argument should be, should a society thrive for virtue, or should a society thrive for happiness.
I firmly believe that the reason Sam and Matt are able to seem like they hold their own, is because these debates take place under their arguments. For instance I can attack Matt's argument by claiming Rights are a concept not a reality, Body autonomy can't be a real thing, because someone can kill you against your will. The argument ought be, virtue vs happiness.
I argue virtue is more compelling, because it's sustainable and can be with you, your entire life. Where happiness is brief spurts of the moment, and not sustainable.
@@IIIJT Yea, this is why the Grays avoid us ...
*_“Dr Peterson, what’s your favorite color?”_*
“Well that depends on what you mean by favorite. And it also depends on what you mean by color. This is a very complex question... One must acknowledge the underlying verisimilitude that is irrevocably nested within a multi-layered metaphysical substrate which many people fundamentally conflate with their ideological presuppositions with no uncertain irregularity, causing the inadvertent dismissal of Jung's archetypal extrapolation of the quintessential axiomatic juxtaposition required to achieve Raskolnikov's magnitude of Neo-Marxist existential nihilism...”
Bloody brilliant.
This might be the greatest thing I've ever read. Right up there with Crime and Punishment lmao
Yep. And on the other hand:
-Mr. Dillahunty, what’s your favorite color?
-Blue.
And then he might even show exactly which kind of blue it is: is it a sky blue, or jeans blue, etc.
Many of these people Dillahunty talks to try to use smarty pants words that most people don't even understand, because they're not philosophers and not debaters. On the other hand, Dillahunty uses simple language and once he uses even a little bit of a strange word, like, agnostic, or even the word atheist, he makes sure that the person he talks to understands what he means when he uses these words. And he tries to stay away from the smarty pants words as much as he can. Matt is probably the best debater on Earth tbh. I haven't seen a more powerful one.
@@KulaGGin Peterson: But really, your favorite color isn't blue, because God put green in your heart.
A perfect Peterson.
What's baffling is how people think Jordan Peterson is a great thinker or intellectual. The man sounds like a delusional teenager at Bible camp. Dillahunty made this painfully obvious.
Peterson sounds like he's either on drugs or completely unhinged. I can't stand him, and I'm a Christian 😂.
Oh I so agree how people can interpret his dribble as intellectual is beyond my imagination .
It's the accent, plus the suit, plus the endless pseudo-intellectual word salad. @@odinallfarther6038
Jordan Peterson is a natural Philosoph in the Age of Science. He rather explores shit with reason and looks what seems plausible then to just check. And the thing is, that he probably never bothers to look what actually has been figured out. So he ends up as this idea of an Intellectual for an uneducated Audience that doesn't botheres to check either. They just want very verbose reassurence.
4 posts but only 1 comment which means 3 of his fanboys posts got deleted because they were raging, which is so endearing.
Peterson's main tactic in all areas of debate seems to be:
1. Make some bold claim.
2. Is asked to elaborate/clarify/back up/provide evidence for said claim.
3. Refuse the answer the request simply by claiming it's a "very complicated question".
4. Start talking in depth about something very tenuously linked to the claim he made.
5. Profit
@@ShuSkiIntl 5. profit. Yeah, you nailed it. The fact that Peterson apparently has his own PR manager or whatnot says it all. Not that it came as a surprise. People like him always do.
Every public figure has their own PR Manager@@Norseman4
Step 1: collect underpants
Step 2:???
Step 3: profit
Where did JP touch you
Peterson is the Rube Goldberg of pop culture. Make everything as complex and convoluted as possible and achieve very little.
I know at least three people who simply stopped smoking and never did it again. They just threw away the cigarettes and they were done.
Peterson would tell you that they weren't really true smokers
I believe you - because I did exactly that, too.
And that’s why god exists. Because people can stop doing a drug that was created by humans….
@@susannehuber3996 : God exists to help people quit smoking? Ha! OK. Good an excuse as any.
@@susannehuber3996 What humans can start, humans can stop. No god needed.
How dare Jordan spoil the plot of Crime and punishment without saying “spoilers”!
haha now i dont have to read it. or now maybe i will read it.
That's what I always think when he mentions books. God...
“CURSES, he spoiled another decades/century old book. How DARE he!!!”
@@TheSket now we don't gotta read it 😎
Yea! It's not like it has been out for long enough to warrant such actions.
i took shrooms but my experience was just below the mystical threshold, so now i'm stuck vaping.
Lol
Same
My brother quit smoking immediately after joining a company that sells health products. Miracle! 🚬❤
i stopped because it just doesn't make me feel good. My mystical experience to help me stop smoking was nothing but a tummy ache.
I took mushrooms, had a great and hilarious (but definitely non-spiritual) experience, and the next day found I had lost all desire to smoke. True (but dull) story.
I'm just proud of Jordan for making it that long without weeping
He forgot about Carl Jung that's why
JP's ability to take incredibly simple concepts and obfuscate the absolute shit out of them is unparalleled.
It's such a dishonest, dirty, underhanded tactic in a debate and shows you're less interested in the audience learning about what you're saying and more interested in them learning that you're smart, a sign of great insecurity.
I'm not convinced of that
Or, incredibly simple people like you just can’t, or won’t, follow what he’s saying.
I understand him... You may disagree but it is not incoherent. And there is nothing "simple" about the topics they are trying to discuss.
@@Warlikerooster03
And yet, for many basking in their own credulous naïveté the topics are simple; you just have to summarily dismiss any notion of humility or authentic skepticism, i.e., skepticism willing to be skeptical of skepticism itself.
I quit smoking by gradually cutting down the amount I smoked on a daily basis until I was down to one cigarette a day. I knew I could go without one a day. Never had a mystical experience. Didn't need one.
Good job
Congratulations on that. That didn't really need be proven, but it apparently for Peterson, it is an outlandish idea for someone to be able to quit smoking without an "experience".
"Never had a mystical experience".
Funny thing, I don't believe you.
@@nietzschescodes You don't believe they've NOT had a mystical experience? Shouldn't it be the other way around? 😄
Not an atheist either right? @@nietzschescodes
I will never forget when Jordan Peterson said "Psychedelics prove God exists because they help people get off nicotine"
Peterson's argument was _ridiculous_ in the root sense of the word: worthy of ridicule.
You probably don't believe in magic hats either. Sucker. More for me
I laughed my ass off at the confirmation that “religious” experience is replicable by affecting the body’s chemistry. Proof that “religious experience” is human creation to explain human reaction. ✌️💗🤘
Then went on to insinuate that ptsd only comes from doing malicious acts within your life.
I was kinda shocked to hear him say that, although I don’t believe those were his exact words. It is worth being careful about quoting. But I’ve heard many what I consider to be wise things from Peterson.
Here's a drinking game. Every time Peterson says "Metaphorical Substrate" take a shot.
He said those exact words as I read your post.
@@capitalb5889 lol. Careful that's a drinking game that will get you seriously messed up.
JP only knows so many big words so he repeats them endlessly.
He could switch it up for metaphysical condensate once in a while.
@@larryscarr3897The metaphysical condensate only forms once he's talked enough hot air into his substrate to make it mist up...
Honestly, I think most of the time he talks right out of his metaphysical substrate. By which I mean arse.
JP's substrate makes me irate.
Imagine asking Jordan a straightforward question only for him to respond with a completely unprompted review of his favourite book. He's 14 year old me trying to insert the Lord of the Rings into every conversation to appear more intellectual.
“I can’t answer you, so I’m gonna try to sounds smart by reviewing a classic book using an overly academic vocabulary and hope you forget the question”
It was mind boggling to listen to. I could hardly believe just how far he went with Crime & Punishment in order to not make his point.
I dont think is that bad. You know not even the wise know all ends.......
Yeah, but did you ACTUALLY read the different variations of the silmarilion, specially when it comes to beren and luthien? POSER
To be fair LOTR is almost always applicable in any context
DILLIHUNTY: "you can quit smoking without a mystical experience."
PETERSON: "No not really."
Ah yes, Peterson is such an intellectual giant...
I stopped smoking, without assistance. So glad I did
Its weird, friend of mine had a cancer scare, she quite smoking.
No mystical experience, just a wake up call.
@@doomzstrafe2749nowadays you can call anyone an intellectual, then
A friend of mine quit smoking 10 years ago after smoking every day for 16 years. He just quit one day, no mystical experience. He just wanted to quit.
@@doomzstrafe2749You're talking about yourself?
Peterson is a world champion at word salad.
Well not a great thing for a meat only eater
@@sebozz2046snap
@@sebozz2046😂🤣😂
It looks that way from my metaphorical substrate.
Exactly... all he does is play samantic games
When I came out to a Christian friend that I had known for many years that I don't believe there is a god, his response was "You just think you don't". he walked away and that was that.
Where do you live that you have to "come out" as an atheist?
@@ClarkPotter The United States of America is one place like that. My hometown in Michigan is a place where coming out as atheist turns heads and gets people worked into a frenzy.
South Africa, people just think your a Satanist. I had an uncle who bragged about starting fights with gay people because he felt he had the right, because the Bible condemns them. Just like that an otherwise decent ish person, lead to do despicable acts because belief is more important than objective reasoning.
@@ClarkPotter The American South
@@ClarkPotter nah man it's the other way around, we are all born atheist, religion comes after from ppl around who were brain washed before.
I don’t think that JP actually believes some of the things that he commits to. I think he does it to appeal to his base.
Oh please. Really? Have you never had convictions at the bar with friends?
Worst defense ever.
Well he does his best to make sure he believes what he says by crafting such great indisputable, unverifiable, and more often than not completely irrelevant talking points. But yes, it would seem that he’s either incredibly talented at vomiting big words with no understanding, OR he doesn’t actually believe what he’s saying and safeguards his position from the masses with overly academic language
@@Gobbertron so we are indemnifying vernacular now? Sure.
@@theshizzzno, unfortunately you missed the point. Political scientists are well known for writing with advanced vocabulary to create obstacles for poor people to read there work. Similarly, Jordan Peterson uses his very impressive vocabulary to make himself sound smart without actually making any relevant or disputable claims. People that don’t have the skills to follow think he’s profound because of it, hence he gains followers and profits. Academic language can be fantastic for conciseness and accuracy-I have no issue with it. I have an issue with Peterson misusing academic language to make his unverifiable claims sound more appealing to his un-academic audience. You’re more than welcome to use your impressive vocabulary wherever you see fit.
JP hasn’t stopped crying since
Huh, now all that crying from JP suddenly seems to make sense.
😂
Matt completely embarrassed Peterson, so I'm not surprised
He did not.
for example:
Peterson was right about smoking too. 95% failure to quit is pretty accurately described as "not really" especially when compared to 80% success. It's not proof of God but instead mat went with the strawman "it's impossible to quit without God"
Mat was not debating peterson but Ken Ham. Mat and ken ham share a definition of God. Peterson does not. They spoke past each other the whole time.
Peterson does not need anyone's help in embarrassing himself, he does a good job of it all on his own.
JP puts in so much effort to appear smart that he does the opposite. Truly smart people take great lengths to simplify things as much as possible.
Exactly... If you cant' explain something effortlessly, you don't understand it... Perterson's reliance on long winded round about wanderings shows he's afraid of being judged to be not good enough. Sounds like a Mommy issue to me. Has taken me a long time to iron out that part of my dysfunction... Still working on it.
God is alive. He touch human heart. Its clear for those who search him. The sin is that they don't believe in Me said Jesus. Yes it is simple.
@@bosatsu76 Yeah his (appallingly bigoted/hateful) views on children is a massive red flag he was abused as a child and his 12 rules for life book has highly disturbing advice on how to hurt your kids, not making them do anything which would cause you to dislike them and all if followed would produce someone fearful of not being good enough, clearly what happened to him, I also heard he was bullied so that would add further to that feeling.
What's an atheist?
"So let me give you this book review"
Well if thats what you took away, it means your just not equipped to handle a decent answer lol
@@JTH43 Jordan Peterson is incapable of providing a decent answer, that's why he waffles on about something irrelevant instead of giving the answer.
@@elgringo1893 You mean like your critique? Lacks substance? No, it just relies on someone following a couple of of logical thoughts rather than just smearing someone generally. Let me ask you, why wouldn’t a true atheist murder a person who negatively impacted everyone around them? If rationally you could deduce that murder would positively impact everyone, why not just do it?
@@JTH43 nah he’s incapable of providing a decent answer
@@ramon2008 Another response with no substance
So when asked what an atheist would look like, Jordan responds with a book report.
It was a politicians answer . Utter nonsense and totally off subject .
he always guides the narrative that some of those questions are unanswerable, so he tries his best through someone else's fiction novel, when in reality he just doesn't know enough to answer a question like that. As you can see he went on a long tangent and book report as you put it and then when Matt who is educated on that stuff, gives a quick and concise answer that isn't drawn out to the moon.
No it wasn't.@@johnchristopher792
@@residual_soapTypical Jordan Peterson word salad with such fun big words so he can say absolutely nothing while he pretends to be an intellectual. It’s unfortunate how well it works for people that have low intellectual self esteem and think agreeing with him make them many smarter
@@Gobbertron absolutely. Its really plain to see but the education system isn't great here in the states so I don't even blame people. Its crazy how susceptible they are to propaganda, misinformation, fear mongering and just blatant narcissism as prominent as it is here.
“You can’t quit smoking with chemical assistance.” (Proceed to advocate hallucinogens as a means to give up smoking)
He thinks the hallucinogens let you access a supernatural experience, and it's the supernatural experience that lets you quit smoking, not the hallucinogen.
To be fair, that doesn't make much more sense.
They work extremely well, or so the science tells us.
As for using the word "can't," I think this is simply imprecise word usage. He clarifies it's very, very difficult a minute later.
I thought the entire discussion, Peterson was teaching Matt quite a lot. I advise everyone to watch in its entirety. I don't believe in god one bit, but I still find Jordan's logical and scientific approach to things to be quite brilliant.
I'm aware of what he thinks. my critique of his logic is accurate@@BigSlimyBlob
@@Christobanistan The problem with Jordan's scientific approach is that you have to know him to understand when he's talking, like psychologists do, in statistical terms. While I personally find that once you know him, the simplification makes his points stand out much more clearly, it also makes him very vulnerable to critique. Especially when debating more literal minded guys like Dillahunty, and thusly exposing himself to his audience, that is a mistake.
Also, when you follow Peterson's approach, then you should know that the statement: "I don't believe in god" doesn't make sense, and just by writing in this comment section you show that you actually do, without even being aware of it. Or to put it into atheism-compatible terms: you follow a set of goals and values by acting them out in the world, and what stands on top of that hierarchy of values, basically your overall current life goal, is your god. You just don't call it that.
@@VolkbrechtI don't put much stock in your last point. I do good things because I like how it feels to do them, and I don't want recognition for them because I get self conscious. Like wise for not doing bad things, I try not to do them because I feel a deep sense of self shame, even if I don't face public consequences.
If those vague feelings, and the mental frameworks I construct around them to better understand and rationalize them constitute a god on the same level as the Abrahamic creator god, then the word has no useful description.
If instead you're saying that a god or gods are just feelings in people's brains that we made up stories about, and the stories got a little out of hand, then I agree with you.
Dillahunty wishes to educate, Peterson to aimlessly pontificate.
Yeah, I can understand why JPs manager didn't want his client getting wrecked.
He only eats meat because his mouth is already full with enough word salad for a lifetime!
😂😂🎉
Lol 🤣
Too clever for words - thanks.
ZING!
😂😂😂
For someone who only eats meat, Jordan sure does love word salad.
Underrated comment.
Ha ha ha. But the comment about Jordan eating only meat is ad hominem and unbecoming.
Guffaw, i confess i find JP so grating, i tune out before givinh it a chance
@@thomaskloecker1572 u homininphobic or sumn?
Shocking that the guy who can't quit drugs thinks that people can't kick addiction without drugs. 😂
I think this conversation with Delahunty might be where I dropped any idea that JP was operating in the same intellectual sphere as many smart people. Constantly redefining anything that disagrees with you so that you don't have to really engage is the hallmark of a terrified mind.
A terrified mind never steps outside of the bounds of Language.
It’s the garden of Eden - the safe place - the training wheels of thought.
You have to step “outside” its contemporary meaning in order to do anything even remotely resembling free thought.
A terrified mind never questions whether they have any foundation for their own morals. Are they merely opinions? It's a terrifying question. Yes, your morals are merely opinions - if you are an atheist ;)
I dropped the idea of JP being an intellectual the first time I heard one of his word salads.
He did this in another debate where he tried to redefine "psychopath," by strongly asserting his own defintion as fact to prove promiscuous people were psychopaths. He's a pseudo-intellectual with a bag of tools, manipulations, and more pseudo-intellectual babble than all Star Trek shows and movies combined.
JP excels in the lecture room. His debates/podcast hosting leaves much to be desired.
Yeah he's also extremely thin-skinned. It's weird to me that so many people think he's the very image of traditional manliness when he turns into a blubbering baby every time he's insulted in the media. His very persona is a contradiction to the way that he writes. You can't preach about self-confidence while literally crying about how mean people are to you. In a better world, that ruins your credibility. Unfortunately we live in this one, so pointing that out makes me a Trans Leninist Snowflake or whatever. I swear we're at the point where elementry school students are more mature than the adults they turn into.
Peterson drives the conversation into a ditch, bounce back out and muddy the tires and declares the car has never been washed. Anybody who can't answer a question directly is selling you something.
Mind Begs the Question:
To support,aid an Apartheid State
Righteous,Evil?
@@HumanBeingsRThinkingBeings I don't understand broken statements. I'm struggling to find a subject or a point.
In Peterson's case, besides Christianity, he's trying to sell you that he's a well read and longtime successful psychologist that commands attention to his every thought.
Worthy of writing self help books that ought not be questioned. All of it. That's what I take away from his word salad.
But put him in a room with a true great mind like Dillahunty (who was never educated at a uni level) and Matt's clear language and thinking totally exposes Peterson. THAT'S why his marketing team said don't ever debate that guy again!
@@A-Milkdromeda-Laniakea-Hominid hahahahahahahahaha a great mind line dillahunty?
What the hell are you actually talking about? lol
@@cameronbell415 The guy humiliates ivy league educated apologists all the time. He's a talented mentalist who makes a good living pretending to read minds. He's dating a dripping hot trans woman half his age. He outfoxes his crazy family and lives a happy life despite their attempts to make him miserable.
Clearly you prefer Jordan "gets banned then reinstated to Twitter by Musk- immediately calls for banning trolls (🤣)" Peterson and his theist buddies lousy with hypocrisy. Birds of a feather I guess.
But no one can intelligently deny a self-taught man who regularly spanks people who don't know a syllogism from a navel despite $200,000 educations is a sharp edge.
"That’s kinda like evidence!" very much sounds like a line from Lionel Hutz...
The best response to this would be to take the statement at face value and reply with a "Well... That's kinda like... Your opinion... Man"
@@jonathansamuelaugustine7969 Hey careful man, there's a beverage here!
Jordan doesn't want to get eviscerated again.
Peterson said you can’t stop smoking without a mystical experience.
So I guess me realising in Uni that I could afford beer, or smokes, but not both....was a mystical experience....
Beer is spirits, so you had a spiritual experience. 😁
That's not what he said though
@connoradcock6643 It is.
That’s not what he said at all. People like you make me lose faith in humanity
@@FunkadelicPancho That is quite literally what he said.
"I place you considerably higher than most apologists that I've engaged with" - Matt Dillahunty
I think that is called 'damning with faint praise'.
"considerably higher" Maybe he was just trying to quit smoking and had dropped LSD in order to see God...
He was being generous JP was nearly in tears
@@LDrosophila isn't JP always in tears? The man has emotional problems.
Metaphorically Substrative speaking of course.
“It’s such a complicated question that that’s the right answer.”
What BS
As someone with advanced degrees in philosophy, symbolic logic and discrete math…. thank you for doing this. It really laid bare Peterson’s pseudo-intellectual bs. I’ve tried to explain it to so many ‘deep thinker’ bros and it’s like we’re speaking different languages… I guess we are lol.
What’s weird is you could tell he felt exposed, until each time he got about 30-60 seconds into ‘lecture mode’.
for real though, not to mention it seems like "deep thinker bros" are all insecure about how stupid they are and don't realize that stupidity comes from a lack of curiosity, so they try to negate all this by following one or more "intellectual" figureheads that they will remember to quote in order to appear smart
My brother, who is a very smart guy, fell for JPs nonsense, until I put him onto the conversation between JP and Matt.
JP is very good and sounding like hes saying something profound, when in reality hes spitting out word salad and deepities.
I think Peterson is a great weaver of words but aA terrible keeper of structured argument. When he debates, he starts putting forth complex ideas that he soon loses track of in his mind. His mental picture unravels but he is quick to verbally weave together old and new bits and pieces on the fly. The result is an argument that looks coherent but is completely scrambled and incoherent at a closer look.
100%@@Wonzling0815
I turned a friend around with JPs conversation with Sam Harris. And I think it's worth noting our friends are both smart but I wonder if yours was looking for something. Mine is bad with people and couldn't figure out why the few personal relationships he had were starting to fall apart around his hardline stance on issues. That's when he found Peterson. Just like with cults, it's not about how smart you are its about what emotional state you're in.
I like JP with very few of his positions. But here he just makes a fool of himself, as he seems to do often lately.
But I feel the same about dillahunty. His discourse around gender is religious.
@@eduardosantana8300
Im in a similar boat that you are.
JP does parrot some valid points, but they are other peoples ideas, whereas his own ideas seem to be a muddled mix of word salad and BS that equates to utter nonsense, which, sadly, a lot of people fall for.
Matts views on gender do seem to be personally motivated, instead of being rationally logically conclusions based on sound arguments and valid evidence, but I wouldn't go as far as to say that his views on gender are "religious", not yet anyway.
He called bupropion boopooprion I'm fucking DOOOONE! 😂
I counter Jordan's fictional 'Crime & Punishment' example with: witch trials. Successful societies evolve morality. If you had two societies, one which encourages theft and murder, and one which prohibits it, the second would be a far more attractive society to live in and would survive. Moral codes evolve like everything else. I cannot understand why some religious people find it 'impossible' to understand this.
Jordan Peterson is a born again Christian who suffered a terrifying near death experience. He is now thoroughly convinced that Jesus is real and the Bible is true while ignoring the neural network of his own brain that produces visions, dreams, ideas, and the constant drone of his own internal dialogue.
Matt is one of the most coherent thinkers I have ever listened to and credit him with showing me how to deconstruct my Catholic indoctrination and find peace within my own head.
And the most incoherent listener I've ever heard with his hardern heart and reprobate mind.
I came back from a near death experience more anti-christianity than ever 🤣
Although I have seen something during that experience, unusual af, never ever heard of anyone seeing the same.
People see tunnels, lights, dead relatives and all thpse clichés.
I saw a whole place made of candy.
Grass, soil, trees, water.
It was all a bunch of candy.
That would be hell if I was a dentist I guess.
@@pleasureisgood5957
The God of candy has spoken to you, me he bless our taste buds with milk chocolate.
@@-paganless-4248 hahahah, yeah.
Tbh this hallucination MIGHT be super scary if I stretch the meaning of it a little bit.
This near death experience occurred during a ketho-acidic coma.
Those types of comas are caused when the sugar in your blood turns to acetic acid due to pancreas malfunction or stop function completly, usually a sympton of undiagnosed type 1 diabetes(can occur with type 2 as well but less frequently)
So, I was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes, both my kidneys almost stopped working and my brain functions and eyes were stopping as well, so I was put in induced coma.
So, if you go by the notion of post-life punishment of the ancient greeks for example it would fit very well.
I would be in a place with abundance of delicious things, vut they all would fuc* me up if I eat them, being so close yet so far of it.
Although I think my main sin is lust, bot glutony, I don't even like sweets too much, it's more likelly my diabetes was hereditary as it is type 1.
But hypothetically, even if I experienced hell I'd still not bow tp tyrants.
@@pleasureisgood5957 but you'd still bow to stalin?
Peterson is just like the people who try to quote him in an intellectual environment: they crack like cheap glass when someone even remotely competent can cut through their bullshit.
And Matt is very good at that.
Sike
If Peterson is never challenged he sounds wonderfully clever, but so does Spirit Science and Deepak Chopra
@@adriandurn5903 matt is a clown who is not capable of listening, simple as that, he's a reprobate.
@@adriandurn5903To be honest, even on his own, he never sounded "wonderfully clever" to me. Maybe that's because the first I heard were his rants about that Canadian law.
After several carefully attempts to hear and understand Peterson, his only point is that you may see god if you take majic mushrooms. All those words for such a simple point. I don't find that clever in the least. He's a man who loves the sound of his own voice.
Jordan Peterson has yet to directly answered a serious question regarding his own beliefs.
"Its a complicated question" and "it would take me a very long time to explain" make my bullshit detector ring loudly.
No, it is complicated.... morality in particular is exceedingly complicated as is the notion of free will. These are concepts that are difficult to walk people through in this kind of format. Maybe he has just become somewhat lazy in terms of describing with problems he is grappling with, or cannot simply break these philosophical concepts down into layman's terms, but I have no doubt whatsoever that he is grappling with them.
I just find myself internally shouting, “get to the point!!”
and people should.
I find myself losing the will to live during most discussions from Americans
They will never get to the point
@@Redwarfa so what are you doing watching this video?
@@SantaInDaHouse I didnt
@@Redwarfa why comment then?
Peterson's answer to the 1st audience question was so long winded that I forgot the damn question. Did he answer the question? Because I feel like he went off on some unrelated tangent. I swear Peterson's in love with the sound of his own voice.
It's what he does, talk for so long when asked something he can't explain, that you forget the point of the question. He talks and talks until you don't care anymore.
Wow. It was actually a brilliant answer. It also ironically elucidates his entire position on the subject, which very clearly is too complex for you to grasp.
@@RileyCallery hmm not really. so Jordan Peterson suffers from what I call the Russell Brand phenomenon, where someone uses so many syllables that you assume they are clever, but the substance of their argument is absolute arsewater. Intelligent people, who understand what they are talking about, can condense complex ideas into an easier to digest form. Peterson doesn't need to give that answer. He could easily just describe the characteristics he wants to get across. Instead he gives such a bloated answer that you just cannot keep track of. Why when asked about atheists...did he start listing the plot of Crime and Punishment, in some detail I might add?
He also makes ridiculous and sweeping generalisations that just don't belong in an honest debate.
Jordan Peterson is capable of making very intelligent and concise points. This is not one of them.
Its that atheists have no morality. But yes he just wanted to hear himself speak for much longer than necessary.
@@RileyCallery
A good teacher tries everything he can to pass on his knowledge.
A bad teacher tries everything he can to look and sound deep.
Jordan Peterson is not a good teacher.
I quit smoking thirty years ago when I wanted to start a family. No mystics or mushrooms needed. Just me wanting to minimise risks to my child's health as it developed in my womb. I made that decision and stuck to it. No mystics, no hallucinogens.
Same, I slowly cut down, then stopped. I was working 9 to 5 the whole time - least mystical experience of my life!
@@octoBadger 💯
Matt Dillahunty completely destroyed Jordan Peterson with that last statement. That was awesome!
"Jordan Peterson doesn't have followers because his arguments are logically airtight. There are many men who are fed up with feeling that they are somehow marginalized or made peripheral. Peterson is someone who is telling them what they want to hear on an emotional level. Jordan Peterson's simplistic perspective on the universe is not sustained by rigorous science."-Neurologist Robert Sapolsky
bingo. I don't think Peterson even believes the things I've heard him say about deities and religions.
@@baptistoriginals True,, i have seen him really try to convince himself that god is real. did not work.. In fairness I saw him try again 2years later and he had convinced himself
@@baptistoriginals lol doctor baptist over here
@@cameronbell415 good one! 🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@baptistoriginals If you think that you have not understood what he says. And by the way, Jordan is neither the first nor the only one who tries to put religion into an evolutionary context. Which is an extremely atheism-compatible viewpoint.
When anyone tells you that they know what you "really" think/believe even though you don't then you know they're a charlatan.
nono, they know what you really believe because Jung told them to
you cannot know, but they do!
To a degree, dont forget humans are animals.
A charlatan? What's the correlation there?
@@thevaccinator666 You feel the need to protect something here. Deep down you need to rectify the narrative you have about Peterson, and you cannot stand people disagreeing with you. Which obviously says something about control. You need to be in control. Cast your gaze inwards and go towards your first memories of not being in control. Now you see it. Save Peterson. Explain to us why you find it insulting that he was called a ''charlatan''.
@@thevaccinator666 assuming you are not being sarcastic...MD performs as a mind reader while JP claims he actually knows what you really think/believe, really, deep down, things you don't even realize but he can see using the crystal ball in his mind... that's a charlatan.
Well…I guess no atheist can ever stop smoking.
Every time Peterson says "metaphysical realm", take a drink because what follows will make you crazy.
Could be a good drinking game lol
“You’re too good to be an atheist” I swear I’ve experienced this before. I exemplified good character to someone and out of nowhere they asked me if I believed in god. Then they were surprised I said no.
"Good" meaning what? And why does it mean anything to be good?
If you're just a walking meat sack temporarily for a few years wandering around on the face of a floating Rock in space. What is good and why?
@@geralhammonds9272 You don’t need a god to develop moral codes and ethics.
@@Pancakegr8 why have "good" moral code and ethics? Who says what "good" is?
And why does it matter? You DON'T matter, you're just a souless empty walking meat puppet.
@@Pancakegr8if we define God as the apex of a hierarchy of values, then anyone who believes in a hierarchy of values advertently or inadvertently believes in God.
We should change the definition of Satan to mean hierarchy of values. That way we can all follow Satan.@@lets_wrapitup
Oh yeah, that question "what would a real atheist look like" was so good, the first time i heard JP actually admit what he truly thinks. We owe that question-asker a steak only cooked with salt on a freshly cleansed grill
"freshly cleansed"? Like with holy water or something?
Jordan is an atheist by mats definition and mat is not by jordans definition. The issue is the definition. Mats version of God is that of Ken ham, magic man in the sky. Jordans is ones highest ideal. So a "true atheist" is someone without any ideal/moral code. To have a moral code is synonymous with being a theist.
It's semantics. It was a real shame they couldn't get past or seemingly even notice that was the case. Both talked past each other the whole time.
I've seen hundreds of hours of both of them. TBH it was a waste of everyones time and so the publicist was probably right. Mat refuses to entertain anything other than sunday school versions of God. He serves his purpose well debating people that believe in that version but for anyone else does not.
Peterson was right about smoking too. 95% failure to quit is pretty accurately described as "not really" especially when compared to 80% success. It's not proof of God but instead mat went with the strawman "it's impossible to quit without God"
@@chrisallum9044explain why Im empathic even tho I don't believe in God.
@@Southpaw88 Most people who believe in God, think you can be empathic without believe in him, they can simply say he "wrote it in your heart" or God makes all his creatures empathic or something.
I don't think it is a very rewarding experience for anyone to debate Matt. There is no learning, only negative condescension
Matt is the most educational debater I have ever seen. There's only condescension when it comes to people like Jordan Peterson, whose drug-addled, broken baby-brain and total inability to make even one coherent point necessitates condescension. How else does one handle a grifter with an IQ of 40 as a result of sustained, self-inflicted brain damage? "You poor thing, I hope you are institutionalized soon" is the only sensible response.
Cries that Peterson won't debate him again, personally attacks him because of his diet
If you didn't know, dieting is healthy and varies from person to person
I literally smoked 100 cigarettes a day, so that's 5 packs. When I ended up in the hospital and was told to either stop smoking or die, I literally stopped smoking from that moment and (it's been 30 years since then) I haven't lit a single cigarette since. What is important is the will (and reason) to understand and persevere in the intention and not some kind of mystical experience. It's really incredible that a man with a degree in psychology can utter such nonsense.
May i ask why you are afraid of death?
One of Petersons go to abilities is to answer a question by talking about ,what should be a short answer, for ages hoping the listener will forget the question.
If you can’t hold a question in your head for the context of the answer. Maybe the problem is with you?
@@siewkimng1085 Thats what he hopes , not what I forget. You try to make me look dumb for what I wrote and you can't even comprehend it. NEEEEEXTTT !!!
@@Bad_Moon_Rising what do you mean that I can’t comprehend? You or JBP?
I mean it's fair if that's what it sounds like to you. But for the artists in this comment section, isn't it hard to explain abstractions? There are no simple answers for abstractions, they're inherently complicated and require some creative processing. Some things don't have a clear yes or no answer. Some answers require more nuance and considerations of many branching but related factors. Often this makes real time communications of these ideas difficult.
@@John.Christopher ironically, you are doing the same thing Peterson does here, although not intentionally. The simple answer would be "That's fair, although abstract questions often require a more in depth answer, especially in the realm of philosophical discussion" but, as an overexplainer, it can be difficult to be roundabout without fear of underexplanation, which, if it wasn't obvious by my own comment here, is something I also suffer from
Jordan wont debate matt because of the quintessential qualities of the underlying principle that if you exist in an antidisestablished monkey banquet then god and jesus could therefore exist...
Don't forget about the substrait.
@@jedsithor The metaphysical substrate?
‘But through Marx lens of the post modernist dialectic how do we know the banquet is real? mean one man’s banquet is another man’s porridge and Little riding hood was never invited. And that is why I’m here today at the community college of Sometown. The globalist Marxists have installed a disabled toilet. This is fascist, they will not force this gender pronoun on me.’
Jordan Peterson probably . .
JP was busy crying in his dressing room.
I’m pretty sure Deepak Chopra knows he’s spouting word salad I wonder if JP knows he is hard to tell the difference between the two
My friend quit smoking after 35 years, cold turkey, and is an athiest. 😂😂😂
Cold turkey is very mystical.
@downscope3133 it sure is. It's cold, and it's turkey. Very mystical.
B..b..but Kermit said that wasn’t possible 😳😱🤯
@@Jenna_Miles
I think he sounds more like Grover.
@@downscope3133 Either way, we can all agree Jordan Peterson is a fucking muppet 🙌😆
I always have a dormitory feeling of the universe giggling every time Jordan is painfully painting himself in a corner. The sound of an old bike being dragged by a bus through the streets every time he's exited.
The importance of the man, or the illusion of it, just oozes like out like a hurt mylar balloon fizzing on a stick.
Superior comparisons!!!🤪😂😜 Today you win the internet!!
Actually, his voice is also not far from the sound of a bike being dragged by a buss, and a toilet bowl too down a curvy road made of ground up chalkboards mixed into the concrete!
like... when pdf file atheists claim that men can give birth?
Updated title: Matt Dillahunty refuses to debate Andrew Wilson
Imagine if Andrew stuck to the debate subject.
@@DeepDrinks Imagine if you had more than one braincell to understand that he was on topic
I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings
@@DeepDrinks Your stupidity has no effect on my emotions.
@@DeepDrinksAre you a trans-man?
There's a noise gate on the audio and the threshold is not set correctly.
having watched that conversation/debate, I can see how JP's producers would have told him to never talk/debate with Matt publicly!
I wouldn't say that Jordan is stupid... but to me, it kinda looks like he has " gone over ". Crossed the line... genius or just bonkers. I think he has gone bonkers.
The level Matt Dillahunty reached in order to misunderstand simple concepts make me think otherwise.
@@Kenar.E how so?
@@Kenar.Eoh please, explain jp's simple word salad concepts 😂😂
@@Southpaw88 I'll copy paste what I already wrote:
I really can't understand how this man refused to understand what Peterson was saying about mystical experience.
Mystical experiences aren't proof that there's something mystical, but they are proof of themselves.
You had a mystical experience? You feel like your life changed or has to change? That's it, that's the "miracle" that happened.
It's not magic, it's not divine intervention as the Bible would intend it, it's a divine intervention of how WE, humans, would act towards ourselves. It's a matter of unconscious action/interpretation of the world. That's the "magic", which isn't, ironically.
For me quitting to smoke was actually easy: I didn't light any cigarette anymore. It has been 15 years ago. No shrooms, no nothing. Must have been god for sure... 🙄
You forgot the ‘Angel’s’ or the ‘Devil’ 😂🤣😂
Yup. One of the most insane assertions JP has ever stated. I quit cold turkey 24 years ago. No supernatural, mystical experience needed. Just the desire and will power to do it.
@@paulcleary8088 I packed up alcohol, it will be 26 years on New Year’s Day 2024 since I’ve had a drop. No Jesus, ‘God’ or ‘Angels’ needed. The baddy ‘Devil’ didn’t try to make me fail either. 😂 I did it all by myself. 😂
@@anthonyharty1732 oh, but he works in mysterious ways. 😂😂😂
Both my grandmother and mother were long term smokers, both atheists, both quit smoking with no mystical experience whatsoever.
My mother smoked from her early teens to mid sixties. She would smoke up to three packs a day.
Just to be fair, Peterson never said, "Atheists are murderers," like Matt claimed, he described a fictional character who was intended by its author to illustrate the way rationality can lead individuals into committing serious crimes absent a belief in a universal God. Not the same thing as saying "all atheists are murderers," or "non atheists never commit crimes against humanity," he's just describing the world as he sees it, which is in the absence of a universal God, all morals are socio-culturally relative and there's no definitive way to claim that what the Nazis did was evil, the gulags, wars, famines, etc. were evil. The only way you can is by redefining good to mean "human flourishing," which puts good in the context of a "good move" in chess, it just puts you closer to winning. And it would be fair to say that winning is preferable to losing in most instances, and that as a civilization we would want as many people to win as absolutely possible, but this does nothing to establish values and morals independent of human opinion. So Peterson's concern is that absent the effects of a belief in God, more Nazis, gulags, etc. might spring up because the stakes of the game are significantly lower. Totally fair to criticize this view, especially since Peterson himself comes off at times like he treats religion or faith as a noble lie rather than a deeply held belief. Not to mention history is full of non atheists committing crimes against humanity!
Hitler was Catholic
When I first came across Jordan Peterson's videos, I thought that he often put things in an interesting way.
Then after a while I realised that all he does is creates metaphors for everything.
JP got a good beating from Matt. He can take an answer that takes a paragraph to answer and write a novel.
Dillahunty was Teflon. Peterson kept throwing verbal garbage and Matt brushed it off respectfully time and time again. Peterson thoroughly embarrassed himself in that discussion - it’s not surprising he doesn’t want to be confronted on his bullshit again.
I hate that he KNOWS "mystical experience" is a neuroscience term that don't actually means something is magical, but entails a bunch of complicated stuff that includes most of the experiences people describe as magical or "meeting god" and all that jazz.
But he won't clarify that, his goal is misleading his followage
"Look, mystical experiences are scientifically proven and also the only way to quit smoking (ignore it's more like the only FAST way and it's completely random and not reliable)
Matt's more than necessarily polite rebuttle was in a nutshell "why don't you shove your book you're desperately trying to hide behind where the sun doesn't shine, as your word salad has no power here".
I'm still baffled that JoPe, when asked to tell what or who a Real Atheist is, comes up with a fictional one.
Years ago I was a fan, and I remember reading his book where he had said the exact same thing about atheism and the typical atheist, alluding to Crime and Punishment. I instantly lost so much respect for him and couldn't even take the rest of his book seriously afterwards.
It's ironic that he admires Dostoyevsky for not strawmanning his characters while using one of his characters to strawman atheists in general.
There not really being any such thing as an atheist makes it difficult to answer.
@@JD-xz1mxOoh, a mind reader, are you?
@@JD-xz1mx, your comment doesn't really make much sense as is but, if I'm interpreting it correctly, it's just an outright lie. No one is making it difficult for Jorderson to answer. He was asked a simple question and he was given every opportunity to answer. He chose to claim that you cannot be a "real" atheist unless you meet his specific criteria. he's really just claiming that he knows every atheist better than they know themselves.
Jordan clearly has his lane but all people have weaknesses. This is his. Also, he knows his brand and he wants the cash. Btw, credit to Jordan for admitting that fact. However, you have to be willing to be exposed. He misjudged Matt and thought too much of himself.
The weakness was mostly on Mat. Mat was trying to debate Ken Ham, not peterson. God to mat means magic man in the sky which peterson is an atheist in regards to just like mat. God to peterson is ones highest ideal/moral code.
They talked past each other. It was a bad debate for that reason.
@@chrisallum9044 that argument leaves alot to be desired. you are overloading a word so that it encompasses alot of things to the point it becomes hard to communicate.
in the traditional sense God is mostly as a reference to the supernatural creator and even in the most abstract religions of Buddhism, even though alot of the physical aspects of the universe are abstracted they still believe in the "creator ". these argument also leads to confusion does the basis of moral compass matter is it based on logic or culture maybe emotions like selfishness could constitute a basis even tho it might be demented. then it becomes clear that everyone is an theist , at this point do words have meaning we cant abstract to much and hope to meaningful conversation at this point .
@@chrisallum9044 Yes, Peterson will profess a belief in God, but his interpretation of a god should never be confused with the average Christian's or Jew's interpretation of what a god is. Peterson, in his early days, at the University of Toronto, clearly relayed to his students that god(s) were a construct of the human mind and imagination, and certainly not a supernatural deity.
@@chrisallum9044 Peterson's inability to articulate his beliefs is not on Mat.
*Does* he have his lane, though?
He pretends to be a philosopher and a historian and a sociologist and a biologist and all sorts of things he is not. He is allegedly a psychologist...
...or was, at any rate...
...but all indications are he was real bad at it.
Performance reviews from the University of Toronto show him to be an ineffective teacher and he boasts about how his clients in his clinical practice were broken people who could not be fixed.
Jordan Peterson is living proof that you should never take a man seriously just because he has a fancy degree.
he is a fricking teacher... it's not fancy... he is not a practising PhD, he is just a teacher, you know, those who can't do it, teach it..
He’s a big hype job
@@gregorybaetens8056Yeah Ive heard that. My first year business teacher was a PhD. Dumb as a bag of rocks
You take him seriously because he brings value. Although when one’s at the edge, you’ll see much experimentation going on. This Harvard and Toronto professor who amassed international respect does have value in quite a lot of regards.
Take care,
When at the VA, I got into an argument with my care provider about the benefits of marijuana. He made several assertions which were just false. When I pointed this out, he said he was a doctor, like that settled the argument. I asked if having an M.D. after his name precluded him from lying. We never saw each other again.
How is JP allowed to “debate” and why would anyone waste their time on him
Normalize Atheism…Normalize Skepticism
💯 Only by becoming accountable to the world we live in and our actions in it, can people truly be their best selves. Your subservience to a higher power is not the actions of being accountable, it’s 😂👁️🥰self preservation at the expense of others, but don’t worry god loves the self serving & barbaric.
@@kariannecrysler640 🙌
Normalize skepticism....atheism will thrive!
@@charlesoliver2535: if there was a way to discourage religious indoctrination of children by their parents, that would already be a great step forward.
@@nicolasandre9886 perpetual ignorance 💯
As a practicing psychologist, Peterson's depiction of PTSD is damn near malpractice. PTSD is something done TO you -- a traumatic event, go figure -- with the resultant psychological reaction being self-blame. This type self-blame gives one the illusion (or delusion) of control during the event, as a denial mechanism to survive the situation. Given his credentials, I find Peterson''s victim-blaming outright revolting.
Agree; the second he said that, I thought about the stats for rape victims having PTSD. People who've lived in war-stricken areas. Hell, people drafted and sent to the front who never fired a single shot.
Blaming the victim for having survivor's guilt?
The psychiatric board that certified him should seriously consider de-certifying him.
Have you heard/read about how Peterson tried to kick his Benzo addiction? Wow. Insane.
@@stevewarren4813
In Islame,
women have semen production
and men can give birth
in Atheist Religion
After so much confusion,
I came to the conclusion:
Atheism and islame
is one and the very same
Jordan Peterson's description of what an Atheist is sounded much more like the definition of a psychopath. He describes someone who could kill another human being without empathy or remorse. There are many times I find what he has to say as being interesting and thought-provoking,, but this is so far off base it is insulting.
@@stephenoppl1259 According to atheist religion, What is wrong about genocide?
Should we ask mao?
I quit smoking 2 years ago. Nothing mystical or spiritual happened leading up to my quitting, and I didn’t take psychedelic drugs to achieve it. I literally just stopped because I realized I no longer wanted to be a person that couldn’t say “I don’t smoke”… I always had to be a person that said “well I kinda smoke but not really and only have x amount of cigarettes per month but I haven’t had any this week and so on so forth. I just woke up and said “fk it, I’m no longer a smoker”, and I’m now 2 years without a cigarette and I’ve had no desire to have one for probably 16-18 months now. And yes, I had a major smoking habit from the time I was in high school to the time I was about 30. I smoked cigarettes and weed habitually for most of my teen and young adult life and I quit both cold turkey with no supernatural intervention.
It’s amazing what the human mind and body are capable of if you just believe in yourself. Stop attributing everything to the made up man in the sky.
For those who believe no proof is necessary, for those who will not, no proof will suffice.
JP is growing into a cult leader, he's lost touch with reality more and more as his popularity has grown among the religious right.
Growing into...? He has been for decades.
@@thomasolson8417 He got a lot more attention in the 2020 election cycle, the right wing crowd flocked to him more than ever before.
@@thomasolson8417 he has not been a host on the daily wire and making episodes for prager u or decrying climate change "for decades" that's been pretty recent
@@radscorpion8 Maybe not in those particular circumstances, but he's been problematic af for decades.
Ironically, Jung wrote about the dangers of Psychologists becoming cult leaders.
I think it was the first debate where i think people actually saw Peterson struggle against a more competent debater. All his other appearances were with journalist or light weight but Matt is season debaters. Peterson probably knew he took a major loss during that debate.
He struggled against Zizek quite a bit.
He didn't. They both did. They both spoke past each other the whole time. I followed mat for years watching hundreds of hours of him. Same for peterson. I'm an atheist too.
Jordan is an atheist by mats definition and mat is not by jordans definition. The issue is the definition. Mats version of God is that of Ken ham, magic man in the sky. Jordans is ones highest ideal. So a "true atheist" is someone without any ideal/moral code. To have a moral code is synonymous with being a theist.
It's semantics. It was a real shame they couldn't get past or seemingly even notice that was the case. Both talked past each other the whole time.
I've seen hundreds of hours of both of them. TBH it was a waste of everyones time and so the publicist was probably right. Mat refuses to entertain anything other than sunday school versions of God. He serves his purpose well debating people that believe in that version but for anyone else does not.
Peterson was right about smoking too. 95% failure to quit is pretty accurately described as "not really" especially when compared to 80% success. It's not proof of God but instead mat went with the strawman "it's impossible to quit without God"
@@andishawjfac zizek was a joke. I watched that one in full too. It wasn't the worst debate though. Mat v peterson was a bad debate because they both used the same words defined completely differently talking past each other rather than genuinely engaging with the meaning.
Both were right in meaning but failed to see that.
for example God = magic man in the sky vs ones highest ideal/moral code.
@@chrisallum9044 this was my impression too, thx for being one of the few that explain without minimization of the JP argument, at the begging i thought that JP was being irrational but then he explained himself pretty well and I think he put a good argument on the table.
Btw can you link me the source of the smoking debate part datas?
@@chrisallum9044 that's because Matt is talking about the only god that christians claim exists and Peterson is talking about some ideas that he made up in his own head
The ancient moral code he describes is simply a person's deeply held subjective moral intuitions
"Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool."
Voltaire
I'm atheist and have been all my life. I've also been smoking since the age of 16, and stopped when I turned 55. There was no god that helped me quit; I just woke up, thought I needed to stop and just went cold turkey. So Petersen, but your specific franchise of god had nothing to do with me quitting. And yeah, I'm still atheist. Healthier, but still no god involved.
According to Petersen, you have not really quit but only think you have since there has been no "mystical" experience yet, which obviously is required for the process...wink, wink, nudge, nudge...
I quit smoking because there was a woman whom I really fancied, but she hated the smell of cigarette smoke. We ended up being together for four years. I didn't go back to smoking after we'd split up.
We were (and still are) both atheists. Nothing mystical there -- unless blue balls count!
Nonono.... you don't get it...
Why stop smoking? Why do good. Why change and be good?
You see... all that is good, is God.
-ex smoker
@@bond3161 "You see... all that is good, is God.
-ex smoker"...
...Are you consistent or is your reasoning inconsistant? Would you also agree...All that is "bad" is also God???
@@GuessWhoAsks I do not agree and one day you will see.
All that is bad is NOT of God.
Ps. If I am not consistent, I'm of course not logical. You have not shown exactly how I am not logical yet.
And what I meant was OF God. Although I'm sure you understood that.
Jordan was rather juvenile in that conversation
I used willpower to stop smoking ...
I stopped smoking in 1972 when no one was stopping. At the time I was 29. The way I stopped was by purchasing a pack of cigarettes and not opening them but leaving them in my shirt pocket. This was a psychological ploy to prevent panic. So yes you can stop but you have to have the motivation.
And strength of character... Good job.
What I admire about Matt is how he's been able to get a debate with such leading personalities him being an individual who doesn't have any particularly remarkable academic highlight. That's impressive.
Impressively sad. Matt's lack of knowledge in many fields is breathtaking. I know young kids that would be Einsteins compared to this bald emptyhead.
He knows his 💩
He might not be all that smart, but he seems honest. I think people can respect that, even if they don't agree with his standpoint. Plus, for any academic, the litmus test of their own understanding is whether or not they can break stuff down so that we, the "unwashed masses" can at least understand the general idea.
@@Volkbrecht 'not that smart'?
You must mean JP
Matt's Hella smart
@@jonnyrondo507Not really. Matt's obviously well read, and he makes a conscious effort to keep his thoughts straight, which is commendable. But his thinking is relatively dull. You'd probably be able to keep up with him, if you had the time and interest to do the reading.
When someone rambles on and on like that, one time I want the person asking the question to be like "what was my question again?"
1:20
My dad quit smoking without any discernible change in his religious beliefs.
There was no mystical event which caused that change.
A 12 year old me told him that if he smokes again, I won't ever talk to him.
My uncle quit smoking and, while not an outspoken atheist, he isn't particularly religious at all.
When someone says, "That's kinda like evidence," you know they know they are talking baloney.
JP being such a star amongst certain communities is one of the most unsettling facts for me.
JP ducks and backs out of every serious debate since Matt. So that debate didn’t just keep him from going back in with Matt but any serious person that knows what he really is. He’s not some amazing deep thinking philosopher he’s just an educated verbose grifter plain and simple. He does fine when he stays in the lane of simple self help lessons for life but he’s out of his league with actual intellectuals
Matt did the same thing to Sye Ten too, basically trashed his credibility on stage.
@@shanewilson7994 According to atheist religion, What is wrong about incest?
should we ask mat pedolahunty?
Eh, you're an idiot if you think JP is a grifter and not an intellectual. Watch his non-religious stuff from before his near-death experience. He is extremely well-intentioned and an amazing teacher. I think this religious stuff is almost entirely created by his near-death experience from benzo addiction.
@@AtheistReligionIsCancer You should ask the prophet Muhammad about pedophilia. I hear he's quite experienced with that.
@@AtheistReligionIsCancer I think you mean the prophet Muhammad was a pedo
Raskolnikov got sick after committing his crime. Peterson says that is a truth. Why is the recidivism rate so high among criminals? Shouldn’t they be turning themselves in left and right?
Actually that is not what Jordan Peterson said .It stands to reason though if an Atheist decides to commit murder he has no real barrier against doing so when just his reason makes a case for it.
He refuses to debate Richard Wolff as well. Apparently they were going to have one, then Jordan's publicist called the University and said he had raised his rates. When the University said they already budgeted out the event and had no more money, he withdrew despite originally agreeing to do it for his standard rate.
Oh they already budgeted out the event? I guess that means nothing could ever change from that point onwards/sarcasm
@@BonusHole That's kind of exactly how bureaucracy works. If Jordan was not afraid of Richard he knows debating him will grow his audience, so money shouldn't matter. The fact is you can see Jordan talk with the educated left, and he absolutely curbs his language. When he talks to a likeminded person his language is much stronger, and he makes a lot more accusations that are simply untrue. He's been criticized for this before, but he only debates those he knows ahead of time he can mop the floor with. Like I said, the rest are polite conversations where he curbs his tongue. Richard Wolff will not have a polite conversation with him. Professor Wolff eagerly awaits being in a room with him just so he can approach him, because Richard will debate Jordan during Sunday mass, a funeral, at 3am while your grandmother is asleep, but nothing will stop Richard from confronting him over his nonsense.
What is Richard some kind of stalker?
Maybe JP wants more money to deal with the inevitable leftist insanity, abuse and inconvenience?
He knows his debate will probably get cancelled and lead to him being falsely accuse of grape so he wants to be sure the place is serious and heavily invested in him.
It's basic contract shenanigans 101 like when Van Halen put a clause in their contracts to have only brown M&M's in their changing room bowls to know if the other party had taken to contract seriously or not. @@macanoodough
He has become a real greedy bastard for sure. His daughter recently went to visit Andrew Tate, and she explained to her dad she did it because Andrew was going to show her how to make more money.😂😂😂 I think even Peterson was embarrassed by her move. Maybe Tate would have put her on a sex cam.
Well Jordan could rest assured that while his daughter would be on a web cam with her bap's out, it would be Tate talking dirty to the teenage male audience via the chat.
Yes, Tate boasted of doing this.@@terrymckenzie8786
You did some really good, really hard work putting this video together. It was great, thanks!
The J.P. cutaways really highlight the similarity between him and the fictional character Michael Scott from the Office.
7:00 -- OMG, did Jordan just say that PTSD sufferers caused their own trauma and ensuing mental malady? And there is no recovery ("they are permanently broken")?