Dope Tech Episode 2

<<@aagardeningservices9460 says : Sam changed whole my life and world view in regard with the illusion on free will when i had to write an essay with the subject of criminal are borned or/made and ive done huge research on physical and mental side of the subject. Once i finished my essay i was happy that i found the truth or atleast my truth that completley changed my view and i lived with that view ever since but sadly after a few years my life turned upside down . a real disaster that can not be explained with words. Illusion free will in practice is a killer for any man who put it in practice.>> <<@IbnMakir says : Jordans hairline miraculously grew back!>> <<@wanderingsoul1189 says : I deleted my Twitter account 5 years ago, and since I have been feeling light minded and positive.>> <<@panzeralienofficial says : This is the prefect example of why its even better to have friends, that you slightly disagree with on multiple areas, than it is to have a friend that aligns with you on everything. That's how we grow as people. Great debate.>> <<@mpsorr says : The darkness or lightness of the abyss depends on the eyes gazing upon it.>> <<@VexylObby says : "I engage in no political discussion" (about his touring). Meanwhile, writes and produces a lengthy video covering his love for Trump.>> <<@iggysh2427 says : You know what's the BEST here? NOT A SINGLE RIDICULOUS COMMENT IN COMMENTS SECTION!!! <3>> <<@jessiejoy1703 says : Jordan Peterson meandering if twitter just brings out the worst in ppl then immediately moving on was peek irony>> <<@kuribojim3916 says : Jordan has both the same glass and the same phone case as me. That's concerning.>> <<@burieddreamer says : I can listen to these two talking for hours.>> <<@bramnl23 says : Sam thinks that people are so egoless that when they see another walking into the abyss that is their rival, they will offer the cure or help when such an event occurs. If there is one book that proves to us that unfortunately people are not like that, but which does give the example that this is advisable.>> <<@MALEXI10 says : Sam, your reference to the troubles in Ireland was wrong and frustratingly used again as a religious example. Firstly, the conflict known as "The Troubles" started in and was extensively concentrated in Northern Ireland (a member of the United Kingdom). Secondly, the conflict arose ultimately as a result of British interference in Ireland hundreds of years before, which lead to the vast majority of the catholic community on the whole island to partake in "nationalist" activities. However, many of the intellectuals at the forefront of nationalist/republican movement were of British Protestant descent. Finally, the differing ideas between the two communities of Northern Ireland predicate on the constitutional question of Northern Ireland. Religious text and belief has no bearing on that reality. It just so happens that those who identify as Protestant and Catholic are often on the opposing side when it comes to the constitutional question.>> <<@kelk713 says : Fantastic>> <<@SynTheoria says : There was nothing new said in this conversation. This conversation was had thrice prior. Why did you guys repeat everything you’ve already said in the past. The repetition is so bad it sounds rehearsed, and that sucks. I think the root cause is that you guys never actually just say yes or no to each other to clarify where you guys agree or disagree in a concrete manner. As funny as this sounds being that it’s obviously an abstract endeavor, Jordan at least tries to draw “concrete” lines to divide their perspectives on specific levels of analysis. Sam, for whatever reason, doesn’t want to engage in the same level of analysis even for argument’s sake. Sam, especially, keeps bringing more into the conversation than is being asked of him, making the topic foggier. Jordan keeps telling stories to try and paint a picture that Sam already understands, presumably for his audience, but his audience has heard these stories dozens if not hundreds of times, and if they haven’t, then they will in other videos. The simple question, “do you think that’s a reasonable,” should be answered “Yes, here’s why” or “No, here’s why” without bringing in so much other fluff. In the case of the question about Dogma, Sam DOES do that when he outlines the difference between knowledge deeply trusted and beliefs never questioned. However, he’s already done this in prior conversations, so why go into it again like it’s something new? Why isn’t every conversation between you guys seeking to establish something new about the question of morality? Why are you guys repeating yourselves? I think the first 2 conversations you guys had were the best. There’s a lot yet to be solved about those 2 conversations. Looking forward to the next discussion about ignorance and free will.>> <<@arnonsha1 says : 6:34 I have a suggestion to that question: I listen to my pain as much as possible. My pain is an expression of my greatest needs and when I listen to my pain it tells me what my needs are and gives me feedback whether I am satisfying them well or not.>> <<@arnonsha1 says : 6:13 great question>> <<@arnonsha1 says : 4:44 hear hear, a very good description of what it means to be connected to one's Dharma.>> <<@arnonsha1 says : 2:05 good and evil are indeed relative terms for the same action can be both good and evil depending on the entity we are judging the effect of that action and also when we judge it. For example the Holocaust was definitely evil but without it the land of Israel probably wouldn't have existed (which will also be considered a good or bad thing depending who you are asking). What isn't relative in the same way is justice and an action will be judged either just or unjust without a consideration of the good or bad it did to someone. For example someone killed someone else. This action is definitely bad for every killing is bad but it might be a just killing if the context of the killing was that the killed person posed an immediate lethal threat to other people that didn't pose a threat to anyone else and there was no other way to stop the possible leathal action. So instead of talking about good and evil it would be much more beneficial to talk about justice and injustice...>> <<@Claego says : For the layperson; for the first 26 minutes they basically use a lot of words to say, "Hi how are you? I'm doing fine. A lot better, in fact, after quitting Twitter. Hey, doesn't Twitter make people crazy? I regret Twitter making me crazy." There was also some stuff about Sam's podcasts but that's the gist lol Wow these intelligent men can talk.>> <<@TBilliards says : 1:46:07 innovation>> <<@thomaseppel says : It was Jean-Francois Lyotard, Jordan, not Baudrillard. You are right on many points, but I respectfully believe you profoundly misinterpret the nature of Lyotard‘s claim on the fall of metanarratives and postmodernism in general.>> <<@lllv1989 says : Sam Harris just seems to create these strawmen that I am guessing you can find handful of individuals who believe in but otherwise most "liberal" people do not believe in (e.g. that slavery is subjective).>> <<@MaddieWilkinson-123 says : Younger??? He aged!>> <<@xdHistorias says : amazing talk>> <<@ALavin-en1kr says : That Christ had Cosmic consciousness or awareness of his consciousness in every fiber of creation is something atheists cannot grasp. Dogma is this truth codified and expressed in scripture. There is human consciousness and there is universal or Christ consciousness. Universal Consciousness and Christ consciousness, is not that a human is God (as no one but God is god) but Christ is one with that Universal consciousness or one with God. We are limited to our human consciousness. There have been others East and West who have reached this level of consciousness. Krishna in the Gita being one. Sam is confused about actually being something and being one (in consciousness) with that thing. If a human has universal consciousness anything is possible. Christ consciousness or rising from the dead is symbolic of all humans reaching this level of consciousness eventually. Sam not understanding how evil arises in a person is not understanding reincarnation and many prior lives that lead to this.>> <<@ALavin-en1kr says : Religion is symbolic when it is reduced to literalism as Sam does, as he obviously does not understand symbolism whose resonance is understandable if a person has the ability to understand it. The Muslim imperative initially was to unite the warring tribes; that was time-specific and does not apply today; although some of its adherent perceive that it does. It is not a universal religion as Christianity (Christ consciousness) is as it is about consciousness (the hard problem for philosophy). Consciousness is the one thing we all share and have in common and the only thing that can unite us.>> <<@ALavin-en1kr says : The problem with materialistic atheism is that it does not understand Consciousness (the hard problem for philosophy); and Mind is it Elemental; emerging with quantum events? They have some understanding of the elemental; and that is all and they make dogmatic assertions based on that. Atheists are dogmatic. Dogma initially was good; its definition was revealed truth. It later came to mean these truths having been codified.>> <<@ALavin-en1kr says : It is the same across the board it is not religion or atheism it is human nature and what expresses wrongly under either worldview. People who have been programed to hate or to evil end up expressing it.>> <<@ALavin-en1kr says : The Catholic Church elevated Mary the mother of Jesus and consequently elevated all women. The Protestant faith inherited this attitude. Christianity is good for women. In India they elevate the Divine Mother but that does not seem to translate to women as they are not safe to travel alone and need a male guardian to be safe in public.>> <<@ALavin-en1kr says : It is good to see men with different views having a cordial, rational conversation. Both are seekers, Sam isn’t there yet as the ‘hard problem of consciousness’ exists for atheists.>> <<@indominicitrust5755 says : Jordan is the poster child for someone who should delete Twitter.>> <<@yansong5113 says : Although their methods and approaches differ, it is clear that both men care a great deal about the future of humanity and are doing their best to enlighten the highest peaks while acknolweding the presence of deepest valleys. Jordan is masterful with traditional metaphors while Sam is brilliant in his breath and depth of modern knowledge. Their efforts are much more complimentary than competitive in their shared goal of lifting humanity out of darkness and hopelessness that seemingly staurates history and our everyday lives, the latter span from social media to presidential campaigns!>> <<@yansong5113 says : A great conversation on a crucial and challenging subject between two wise men. This is a subject that has challenged the greatest minds throughout history, so no easy answers. But it can still be enlightening. In fact, that's the only way any human being has become enlightened at all, ever!>> <<@therelaxedangler9326 says : Both these men kick ass>> <<@noellecuisine8912 says : ❤another wonderful conversation, thank you gentlemen!>> <<@Livingsamsara says : When I'm encountering someone on a psychedelic substance who thinks they're going deep with a phrase like "consciousness is an illusion" I cannot engage seriously in the conversation. I respect their current experience but I'm not experiencing the so-called "non-illusion" they are currently having... which... is yes, their current consciousness. So that's another case of the snake eating its tail. [ie. "This is a true & perfect book because the book says it is."] This was such an interesting conversation & I just had to pick out that one small point. But please talk later of Ignorance, Free Will, Malevolence!>> <<@deanmartin1071 says : Why don't you point out that to make a Harris idea of a peaceful sosiety all the people would need to be a clone of someone like Jesus. Religion is as much a moral law as we can get on earth. Not every religion. Western Christianity is as good as it gets. I don't have to believe the Bible is an exact description of past happenings to fully understand it's value at the same time understand it's written by humans. Its been used for profit and power as well as good versus evil. After all, humans are the ones reading and using it and humans are corrupt. Harris is an idiot to believe humans can exist peacefully on earth together without strength to enforce that peace.>> <<@LM-ks2rq says : Both are great thinkers. That does not mean they are 100% right 100% of the time, people have different information at different points in time, but they give a great guide as to how to approach things.>> <<@katinthecorner says : Always love the debates between these two legends.>> <<@xenophon5354 says : Grounding Good in “self-evident” evil does not escape the problem of grounding. That is, ultimately, an emotional appeal to our emotional reaction towards the Nazi guard or Taliban. It still does not answer why such things are bad. It still is not firm ground.>> <<@xenophon5354 says : Sam falling, as ever, into the Ought - Is>> <<@D3monHunt3r_ISRP says : I like discussions like that and respect Sam for discussing his point of view and all. But that comparison between Osama Bin laden and Trump was so hard to hear he sounded like one of those with TDS...>> <<@berrylict says : 2:08:19: "You bet, man. Alright! Ciao!">> <<@NeuroReview says : Rating: 7.8/10 In Short: Twitter bad, religion good? (Maybe??) Notes: Sam and Jordan, once again, have a great conversation full of overly explained and somewhat big words (but more like big phrases) with profound impact and wisdom and intellect, often over our heads. But they instead start by crapping on twitter for 30-40 mins, which was a bit silly, and Jordan graciously changes topics to good/evil. This is when things get good, as you start to hear classic Sam ideas on good with great examples of islam and terrorism, then jordan mentioning airports and his hatred, but all while referencing big ideas and big philosophical and psychological topics and thinkers. Throughout this they basically agree that there are goods and evils and getting through these is important and recognition is also important. Then they dive into religion elegantly, and Sam puts a great argument up why dogma is bad. Jordan side steps this, so not disagreeing, by just emphasizing the power of sacrifice and the passion, and Sam doesn’t really have a great defense besides that Christians are not in line with scientific thought and that the 'claim about the books are so preposterous'. I would love to hear Jordan give a rebuttal to this. More of this discussion in the future would be HIGHLY RECOMMENDED. NEED A 4 HOUR RELIGION POD, 2-3 hours free will pod, and maybe a 2-3 hours book/literature pod. What about a guest series with Sam Jordan?? Similar to hubermans guest series, or how you have Pageaugt on a bunch.>> <<@Tinsoldier85 says : Jordan, do you understand the difference between a description and a prescription? The man whose name you can't even pronounce or remember wasn't "disallowing" or prescribing or imposing anything, he was attempting to *describe* the attitude towards metanarratives in society as it was back in the day when you were a lad of about ten. Philosophy is an academic discipline. If you're interested in French philosophy of the 1970's, go get an education in that, instead of endlessly arguing with something you don't understand. Not trying to be disrespectful here, not anymore than I'd be while giving an F to a student.>> <<@nov3m472 says : happiest looking atheist>> <<@markdatheist9179 says : Seeing Sam get TDS has been one of the great tragedies of our time. The woke mind virus got a mind that had been worth preserving>> <<@Sacrifice.Online.for.Offline says : Sam meditates so much he fails to notice his own sense of humility>> <<@yaeli_i_guess says : I love Sam Harris.>> <<@AlchemInk says : @jordanpeterson doesn't understand what meditation is.>>