Dope Tech Episode 2

<<@willwerly5600 says : Former Christian. 23years of truly believing. And no ill will towards religion. With that said, for Christ’s sake…I love how convenient it is for JP to just casually redefine what religion is according to him. Again, no dog in this fight but to my former self, the convicted believer, what an insult and a slap in my face and every strong follower I knew. Must be nice to be on the pedestal he’s on to preach his gospel. The gospel according to Jordan Peterson. Ya gotta give it to the man, it sells. But ain’t no gospel Im familiar with over decades of following. Just like Dawkins speaking on religion, JP is a great educator in psychology, but has no business in this field either.>> <<@angryretailbanker5103 says : “Why does it matter if it’s historically true or not?” Because all the rules that Christianity wants its followers (and the rest of us, whether we like it or not) to follow stem from the credibility of the rule giver, God. His credibility comes from his alleged infallibility; the idea that every word, action, and dictate from him is unquestionably correct. The stories and texts of the Bible, collectively, are the argument for God’s infallibility. They are, to put in court trial terms, the facts of the case. If nothing in the Bible (or Torah or Koran) is true in the sense that it historically took place, then what argument is there for God’s infallibility? And from there, the credibility of his rules and commandments? And from there, any reason I should follow any of it? If they’re not historically true, they’re just stories. And stories have value, don’t get me wrong. But anyone can make up stories at any time.>> <<@slkjvlkfsvnlsdfhgdght5447 says : i disagree with the initial comment about intelligence and evolution: in order to achieve the best surviveability, it makes perfect sense for intelligence to give you the most "real" conclusions. if you don't know how things are, how can you prepare for them?>> <<@theDanishMermaid says : Alex is brilliant, wow❤>> <<@slkjvlkfsvnlsdfhgdght5447 says : a rare highly intellectual video on youtube! i like it, and i got here completely by accident!>> <<@gregrice1354 says : Mr. Peterson, please refrain from speaking as an authoritative Christian apologist, without even having the knowledge of the name or category of evidence Christian apologetics. You reveal yourself to be a self aggrandizing, publicity seeking narcissist - which necessarily betrays any possible mature relationship with the God of the Bible. You present yourself here as an ass. Your motives are not clear, except as attempting to pursue continued public discussion with the young anti-Christian, Alex O'Connor. In this situation, you appear to be fawning or patronizing and manipulative figure, seeking more public discussion time, by means of extending discussion, whatever the rationale you use. Basically, you have already established that you are deceptive if not intentionally dishonest and misrepresenting your familiarity with the well established forms of scholarship related to God and His Scripture. It has not been established that Mr. O'Connor even has completed a bachelor level college degree, yet he presents himself as authoritative or well-studied voice of credible challenge to evidence based resurrection of Yeshua the Messiah, foretold from the oldest Scriptures, Job and the Tanakh.>> <<@JonathonKreinberg says : The last point about Christians misunderstanding metaphysics has some truth and some error to it. If we were to conflate history to material, then surely it is true that's its meaning is insignificant. But just as I am not mere material, so as well is not my beloved. In other words we know that other people literally exist in the same way we exist. Love which fits like a key into our nature requires that. Hence, the significance in Christ historically walking this earth is that he actually exists in the same way our mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, friends, etc. exist. It is not a question driven by materialism. It's like looking in your father's eyes and wondering if he exists. He exists, anyone who has common sense knows he does.>> <<@brunosaisi says : Someone give this Man a dictionary!😂😂😂>> <<@coolcat23 says : "...have a metaphysics that's not Christian." Well, maybe they don't want helpful memes, but what is actually promised (afterlife, and all that jazz). Maybe those people won't buy the whole story unless tiny little details like the resurrection (which weren't primarily taken up by Christianity because they are archetypical but because they are supposed to prove that a deity was actually involved). Peterson presents the development of Christianity as if it had been an exercise in creating a captivating story. The claim of Christianity is not to be a great collection of memes, it goes much further than that. Peterson's take on normal and simple questions that imply answering them honestly would apparently mean betraying the "significance" of the metaphyics attached to their answers comes across as very dishonest. As does the language game of not acknowledging that the majority mean "factual" when they say "true", rather than "conducive to survival". BTW, human intelligence has flown the "true = conducive to survival" perch. One can prove that "2 + 2 = 4" whether that helps survival or not. Even if believing "2 + 2 = 5" would be better for supporting our survival, we'd be able to figure out that this is an incorrect claim. Just because our brains are the result of survival pressure, does not mean that they are still slaves to the latter.>> <<@defface777 says : I really like Alex and Jordan talking about interesting topics like this!>> <<@JamesJosephFinn says : This man has no business defending Christianity. He’s ill equipped, and should stay in his lane. Problem for him is, his lane, psychology, is bs; hence why he’s fluent in bs. In other words, he should just retire.>> <<@rabbitisrich says : The rustling in the bushes analogy doesn’t really work does it? You don’t necessarily ‘believe’ there’s a tiger. The point here is that you don’t know, surely?>> <<@PhilipSuitters says : There are a lot of JP online clips of him telling how to win an argument and the main tool in his arsenal is continually asking your opponent to define what they mean by certain terms or words. He now does this so often he can’t control it and he’s become a sad parody of the force of nature who first came to fame.>> <<@sunset1952 says : Jordan Peterson doesn't want to answer questions like this because he doesn't want to lose his "intellectual" followers and his religious followers, so he reverts to giving non-answers.>> <<@jmcsquared18 says : I'm amazed Peterson kept this and uploaded it onto this channel. Alex basically allowed him to hang himself in this conversation. "That's not my problem." Well, then you have no reason to get annoyed when your listeners are confused af when they hear you talk and consequently write you off as a wacko. Every good teacher knows, if you are interested in people receiving what you're trying to say to them, then you have to package it in a way that they are amenable to. The issue clearly is that Peterson simply doesn't think it matters to people, even though it does. And that doesn't even begin to touch on how, in many other conversations with far more suspicious characters, Peterson seems to nevertheless fit right in. Alex did an absolutely smashing job in this conversation.>> <<@Paulscole3 says : Alex is like many Skeptics who apply rational thinking to the majority of their lives but fight tooth & nail rationalizing Christianity to the point of an irrational defense. Worse than Alex, by far, who does this is Matt Dillahunty, who thinks the truth he made up is more factual than the actual facts, and now the clown is saying Jordan's afraid to debate him again. 🙄 Don't let the clowns pull you back into the circus unless you're going for the entertainment...🤣>> <<@kylebrewster1205 says : What is everyone expecting Jordan Peterson to do when asked did it actually happen or not ? Jump in a fucking Time Machine and go back to see if it did or not, it’s completely irrelevant when you actually think about it. Thats like asking do you think the sky was still blue 10,000 years ago ? Probably. But who knows, I can’t say for certain, neither can anyone on this earth including Alex o Connor. There are some things that are never going to be provable and people want any reason to dismantle what Jordan Peterson is trying to say, he is saying there are reoccurring events in the bible that we can relate to today to live as better people. Even if those stories are false, he is doing it in the hopes that people will follow suit on living a better life and make better choices. What is so wrong with that if it actually happened or not ? If you don’t believe it then don’t believe it and choose to live a happy life, or don’t. Some people need to be reminded that we are supposed to try to live to best of our potential and need stories to remind us where our lives will go if we continue to choose instant gratification. The origin of the story doesn’t matter nearly as much as what you take away from it.>> <<@CThames90 says : The question can go three ways. Is it a true allegory, did it truly happen in history as an event, or is it both? of the three options, the correct answer Biblically is both. Yes it did happen in history and God deliberately added allegorical content to further demonstrate His sovereignty throughout history. He did it to validate the Jesus and the resurrection by describing the elements of the Gospel before the event actually happened. Now, as Jesus says in Luke 24, we can go back and see it was His plan from the beginning.>> <<@OrmondOtvos says : Thank you, Alex, for revealing the exact technique, or lack of narrative expertise bubbling under JBP's facade of "wisdom". I've noticed it for many years. Boy, is Peterson angry and combative!>> <<@alohaoliwa says : JP: i'm more aware of the things he knows that i don't know than he is of the things i know that he doesn't know.>> <<@bruceh1964 says : JP is not engaging in good faith. Did the events in Star Wars where the ewoks fight the storm troopers really happen? No. Did the holocaust really happen? Yes. You can’t avoid the question because of your like or dislike of the story.>> <<@robinfrench1914 says : Atheists and Jungians are coming from such different frameworks that they can't seem to have a productive conversation.>> <<@mikecronis says : There are many truths.>> <<@michacieslak2346 says : Well, with exodus or resurrection, I don't think is overcomplicated question. Priests teach and do believe Moses was really talking to a god who manifested himself as a burning bush. Religious people really believe there was a man named Jesus and he died on the cross and was resurrected after 3 days. In the official teachings of Christianity it's kind of all true. When science comes and says "well, universe was not made in 6 days", it's only then that religion says "okay, let's change the narrative and now it's just a metaphor", but until that happens, religion teaches ALL OF IT is LITERALLY true. EXACTLY the way it's written in the bible. And I think Alex question with the time travel aspect was a good demonstration of what people mean by "true" or "really" (it's weird to have to explain what you mean by it). Like if you time traveled to my house, time traveled to yesterday (13.09.2024) you'd see me playing guitar for good amount of that day. That's what really happened. So similarly, if I time traveled to time and place of when and where Moses supposedly talked to a burning bush, would I see and hear it? That's what I, what people mean by "did it really happen".>> <<@TheMNbassHunter says : Can JP just have a conversation like a normal human, ever? He's such a gas bag, so worried about sounding smart that he forgets to make a point or any sense with all his fancy word salad. DID THE EVENT HAPPEN, AS WRITTEN, AT THAT TIME OR NOT?!? Just answer the question, you numpty!>> <<@brianjay9811 says : “I’m more aware of the the things he knows that I don’t know than he is of the things I know that he doesn’t know.” And Jordan said this with a straight face, and with no humorous intent. It's mind boggling, how he can visualize such a convoluted concept and then perfectly articulate it...>> <<@BaseSixBasics says : Good liars mix truth with their lies.>> <<@danielshindler2368 says : There's nothing wrong with Darwinism, it's Social Darwinism that's the problem. And many religious people misperceive that Darwinism means Social Darwinism, so they reject Darwinism>> <<@crufflerdoug says : Obfuscation is a form of insincerity. JP obfuscates for a living.>> <<@MapleGoodness says : It seems clear that JP is saying he avoids giving straight, honest, answers to some of the questions talked about because he's afraid of where the conversation might go if he were to give a straight answer. Telling.>> <<@OmniphonProductions says : I love to get deep in the weeds of every rabbit hole, _but_ obfuscation doth not a straight answer make. I'm generally disgusted by how much so many people I know internalize every Jordan Peterson sound bite they hear...as gospel...even when he's utterly out of his academic and professional wheelhouse. Having said that, I _really_ enjoyed this interview. My views on, "Life, the Universe, and Everything," are based on _probability according to consensus among the majority of subject-specific, qualified experts, whose peer-reviewed conclusions are logically derived from the entire known body of relevant, objectively observable, consistently demonstrable evidence...basically Materialism._ BUT... This video makes me want to read the Bible with my kids, not as the History and Science textbook that it definitely _isn't,_ but as an anthology of philosophically instructive parables and analogs. The Bible is replete with demonstrable falsehoods and even _more_ things that, while not demonstrably false, are also not supported by any body of compelling evidence (as described in the above paragraph). _However,_ even for an Atheist, there are valuable lessons in the Bible. Plus, while the most valuable lessons are by no means _exclusive_ to the Bible, the Western World's conversational lexicon is full of biblical "shorthand" that helps people to quickly generalize otherwise complex topics. To the extent that it can help total strangers carry on a more efficiently productive dialogue, maybe it _doesn't_ matter whether anything in the Bible is _factually accurate._ Unfortunately, at a time when a major political party has been...pardon the dramatic wording...hijacked by White Evangelical Fundamentalists, who _insist_ that everyone should be legislatively mandated to adhere to the parts the Bible _they_ believe are true (even while utterly excusing their standard bearer from _all_ the same standards), it _very much_ matters when the scriptural references they are trying to make _the law of the land_ are demonstrably _not true!_ Thankfully, while the internet is _also_ replete with demonstrably false (and/or not demonstrably probable) information, people are being exposed to _different_ information than _only_ what their parents and designated authority figures spoon-feed them. This has led to an exponentially increasing exodus from religious participation and the dogmatic thought it promotes. As such, more and more young people are adopting sociopolitical philosophies that are more emblematic of the Enlightenment thinking that gave rise to America's _secular_ government model in the first place. For that matter, regardless of whether Jesus...as depicted in the Bible...was _real,_ I would argue that many of those young people are following His lessons far better than their Historical Revisionist, Christian Nationalist elders who (ignoring that the 1st Amendment and 1st Commandment _utterly_ contradict each other) claim, "America was founded on Judeo-Christian principles,"...specifically meaning the Judeo-Christian principles _they_ believe, while ignoring the contradictory words of the Founding Fathers themselves. As Dr. Peterson alludes to at the end of the video, people who insist that _alternative_ facts are true and _demonstrable_ facts are false seek to base law on, "...a metaphysics that's not Christian," _or_ factual! Whoa! How did this soap box get here?>> <<@rstevenhanson says : First time I've ever understood JP. I credit Alex.>> <<@skypilotace says : 7:48 - This idea of "the archaeological evidence tends to fall on the side of historical accuracy in relationship to the Bible" is demonstrably false. Time and time again, surveyors have come up flat when trying to match the grandiosity of Biblical claims vs reality. Although some of the biblical towns and cities that are mentioned in the Bible have been discovered, this only proves that people wrote about events within places that already existed. However, the events themselves have been debunked on numerous investigations. One small example is the supposed grand city of King David. When they finally discovered this "city", it turned out to be no more than just a tiny, unassuming village in the wilderness. Some cities were actually abandoned centuries before stories were written about them. I could go on and on about the falsehoods of the Bible as it relates to archaeological discoveries.>> <<@jensbekaert166 says : 14 minutes to ask one question ... Jordan ,you shouldn't answer different questions then those whom are asked because you want to avoid the asked question ...>> <<@gerardjayetileke4373 says : "You don't get to do that". Tell that to historians whose job is to ask the banal historical questions. This level of extrapolation and abstraction is absurd.>> <<@misterkramer8279 says : So....?>> <<@Slumpdunnet says : 'I'm more aware of the things that he knows that I don't know than he is of the things that I know that he doesn't know. Right?'>> <<@Everythingisaconspiracy says : JP is an atheist.>> <<@richardcheek2432 says : 1) Time cannot be of infinite duration any more than one can count down from infinity, which is impossible since there is no first number to start the series. 2) Since time cannot have had an infinite duration, it must have started at some point, and so there was a period in which there was no passage of time, no time flow. 3) We know from physics that there is a reverse relationship between time and mass. the slower time is the greater the mass in that space. Zero time flow = infinite mass. 4) So this creative force has infinite power, infinite mass and so is omnipotent. 5) The laws of Science show that this Creative force has intelligence and is capable of forethought. 6) thus we have arrived at the simple concept of an intelligent Creator.>> <<@eingast7798 says : the last couple of thousands years plenty of people got killed because of these nutjob "believers". Thanks, had enough. Clean up your room before believing one of these 3600 different gods fictions.>> <<@ryaneliasbaker says : The ultimate crossover episode of the self-help and philosophy YouTube multiverse.>> <<@joshfriedman9775 says : You seriously need to learn to STFU and let people talk.>> <<@EdwardDanilyuk says : There is not a better passage than Romans 1:20-22 to describe this conversation and JP in general. 20 For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his visible qualities - his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God. 21 Yes, they knew God but they wouldn’t worship him as God or even give him thanks. And they began to think up foolish ideas of what God was like. As a result, their minds became dark and confused. 22 Claiming to be wise, they instead became utter fools.>> <<@djohnson2536 says : Alex's ability to calmly and reasonably debate people is a real breath of fresh air nowadays, compared to the ideologues of the modern day who interrupt and miscontrue what the other person says>> <<@blasebarrett8397 says : Great stuff!!>> <<@andyMSH700 says : "the people who ask that are people who have a metaphysics that’s not Christian"....exactly.... we all know many passages of the bible are inaccurate...just take the guidance, meaning and intent from them and you will do ok. Spending a lifetime making lots of money misguiding the sheep trying to disprove the bible is such an easy target...enjoy the fame while it lasts.....eternity is forever.>> <<@telvinteiko2217 says : Let religious people put their claimed miracles into practice.... there they will move the goal post. Covid exposed them>> <<@rawrisimo says : "What does it mean historically that the spirit of God brooded upon the primordial waters? No one knows!" Well, Mauro Biglino would like to have a word with you, sir. We would have to deal with the original texts, not the theological transcriptions of the Bible, which is what most discussions revolve around. For example, the supposed "Glory of God" (the kavod) is described as showing characteristics of a flying machine (noisy, traveling from one direction to the other, bright, burning everything in its way, lethal to animals, tanning Moses' skin). What do we make of that? Is that just a really elaborate analogy? I think Jordan is taking the easy way out here and suppressing any possibility of a literal interpretation just to stick with the "It's all an allegory, take for example the burning bush", which has a degree of validity, but in regards to the question "Did that really happen?", well, I think the problem is waaaay more complicated than saying just an allegoric interpretation. Precisely because we don't know, we shouldn't just take it as just a bunch of symbols just because we can't put all the pieces together.>> <<@trinibornsolyah says : Alex O'Conner judging what Jordon Peterson response, but cutting him off. Of there is archeological evidence, are these people choosing not to see it.>> <<@cocis911 says : Huge congrats to Alex for navigating Jordan's angry and irritated disposition so masterfully. So much so that he manages to extract a near actual answer from him! Jordan is exposed here to be really quite ridiculous and evasive over the topic of whether events historically took place or not. He is intelligent enough to be able to parse his answer into 1) "I don't know" and 2) "this isn't the most important aspect of this though".>>