Existentialism Talk

University of Toronto PSY
Course Information: jordanbpeterson.com/Psy230H
Playlist:
2015
-- SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL --
Direct Support: www.jordanbpeterson.com/donate
Merchandise: teespring.com/stores/jordanbp...
-- BOOKS --
12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos: jordanbpeterson.com/12-rules-...
Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief: jordanbpeterson.com/maps-of-m...
-- LINKS --
Website: jordanbpeterson.com/
12 Rules for Life Tour: jordanbpeterson.com/events/
Blog: jordanbpeterson.com/blog/
Podcast: jordanbpeterson.com/podcast/
Reading List: jordanbpeterson.com/great-books/
Twitter: / jordanbpeterson
Instagram: / jordan.b.peterson
Facebook: / drjordanpeterson
-- PRODUCTS --
Personality Course: www.jordanbpeterson.com/perso...
Self Authoring Suite: selfauthoring.com/
Understand Myself personality test: understandmyself.com/
Merchandise: teespring.com/stores/jordanbp...

[@_spacegoat_]

I'm very happy to see the new semester's lectures are being posted. Looking forward to the "Maps of Meaning" course, too.

[@dianarahmed8552]

This is just mind blowing, life altering material. I think every educated person in the West must listen to this lecture!

[@ExistentialWill]

But Kierkegaard completely destroys Peterson: "On the whole, the Sophists considered themselves to be physicians to the age. "In Plato, therefore, we always find that whenever the Sophists are obliged to make a statement about which art they possess, the invariable answer is: the art of public speaking. But it is in precisely this sphere that the positivity of the Sophists manifests itself. The public speaker's concern is always with a particular case; here it is a matter of seeing something from the front, from behind, of chattering up one side and down the other. On the other hand, he is dealing with a great num- ber of individuals. Here the Sophists taught how to work upon the emotions and passions. It was always a matter of the particular case and of victory in the particular case, and of this the Sophist was sure. An analogy may throw some light on this positivity in Sophistry. Casuistry hides exactly the same kind ofsecret that Sophistry hides. In casuistry, incipient reflection is halted. As soon as this reflection is permitted to emerge, it demolishes casuistry immediately. And yet casuistry is indeed a positivity, even though a more profound consideration sees its negativity. The casuist is secure and calm; he feels that he not only is able to help himself but is able to help others as well. If someone doubts and then turns to a casuist, he always has seven pieces of advice, seven answers right at hand. This is certainly a high degree of positivity. That this is an illusion and that the casuist nourishes the sickness he wants to cure is undoubtedly the case, but he is not conscious of it." - The Concept of Irony, With Continual Reference to Socrates

[@martinburrows6844]

@@ExistentialWill I'm not sure what your trying to say, perhaps I'm uneducated , are you able to simplify what you mean with this text ?

[@fungling7982]

@@ExistentialWill That seems out of context since it's really confusing, but on closer inspection it seems to reinforce what Dr Peterson is saying about the Soviets.

[@BleedingSnow]

@@ExistentialWill I apologise if I'm stupid, but I really don;t see how that "destroys" Peterson let alone applies to the same context of Peterson's points :/ Care to explain?

[@mariannabauerlein9486]

I agree!!

[@TopHatKitty]

I feel like my school is corrupt and you have given me to courage to stand up for my ideas and to not shy away from dangerous debate.

[@Mitia_k]

Loving the production quality ! Oh baby ! This year's courses are gonna be extra good hell yeah

[@RadzisVideo]

1:05:05 - It was called Belamor canal, and they still sell russian cigarettes labeled "Belamor canal" like it was some kind achievement to be proud of.

[@borisnikolic246]

Maybe they are just using the name as a warning label, saying those cigarettes are as deadly as the canal was. :D

[@DVanDuyse]

A really superb lecture. One of Jordan's best. Being in the U.S. watching our election this year year it sure hits home.

[@souljacem]

What a fantastic lecture. I love this man so much, no price is high enough to pay for the help and inspiration he gave me. Thank you a lot Dr. Peterson, i hope you get well soon.

[@jimcameron9848]

I have been waiting two years for this specific discussion topic and while it does appear elsewhere I was interested in having this topic addressed and knocked out of the intellectual ballpark specifically by Dr. Peterson. Needless to say, I am delighted and will begin watching! Regards, Jim Cameron

[@enneagram84]

What an incredibly powerful talk

[@despair3437]

always a joy to listen to Professor Peterson

[@kevinfeyko3509]

I love your lectures and am excited to see the video quality is improving. Hopefully this becomes the standard for your future videos!

[@memopinzon]

Production quality bump is amazing. Just to point it out, for some reason there's only audio on the left channel.

[@norevelation]

Yeah, I'm only getting audio out of my left speaker.

[@follow_fraser3081]

It would be an easy fix in software. Just add the audio track to the right.

[@memopinzon]

I don't mind it, just pointing it out so the other videos in the series don't have the same problem.

[@NeverWolf]

I would also suggest a wider aperture lens. That or more light. Lower ISO. It's nit picking on something that has been greatly improved beyond necessity in any case.

[@sevillaking6677]

This looks like a backup. The other lectures are better.

[@thebathtub9680]

You know how true "freedom of speech" is today when you just have to make an alternative account just to say that you agree with some ideas, because of how easy it is to simply Google your name and find out how you are against stuff like radical feminism and political correctness. Tweeting, for example, something that opposes ideas such as "we need more women in universities" is considered a career suicide. Even trying to stir a discussion around it by voicing your doubts can be interpreted as a sign of something radical inside you, and you will enjoy being stigmatized for it. Eventually, you'll learn to use double speak and hide your true ideas from plain sight, which of course means that they will never be really criticized or examined and fester underground, as professor pointed out. It's so sad that the internet ended up being the last bastion of free discussion, given that the majority of the time you cannot even have a civilized one.

[@JoshuaWonser]

Or you could speak your mind and have an open discussion. If you're speaking without malice you'll have ground to stand on to iterate your points. If you do get unfairly crucified, take it to court and get paid.

[@apotheosis00]

Joshua Wonser where exactly do you get payouts from the court of public opinion? Also, the court of public opinion also does not support due process, so expect not to be received fairly. This is exactly the point of the comment you responded to. There's no avenue except doing so under a pseudonym (like I do, also) because the risk is too large.

[@JoshuaWonser]

apotheosis00 Actual courts, which protect workers from unfair termination and the like. So if one does get thrown into SJW mob justice resulting in their termination, then start a case against the employer. Of course, there are Codes of Conduct that workers sign, hence it's essential to speak your mind *without malice*, and to not speak as a representative of the company. I do agree though, that SJW mobs are chilling to free speech since it threatens the possibility of this whole ordeal; but if one is careful with their words, free speech is still very much alive.

[@BrettonFerguson]

I use my real name and say all kinds of things. But I don't care. Fuck 'em. I've probably been on the ADL's list of assholes for 25 years.

[@roufflyspeekin9330]

ya baby !

[@TopHatKitty]

I'm currently doing a degree is psychology right now and I feel like I found this information at a perfect time in my life.

[@rhiancooper4178]

I seem to have found your lectures at a critical point in my life. you are brushing on many topics that strike me to the core. as a high school dropout with what feels like hands reaching into my mind to gift me their feces as sustenance. you Jordan Peterson have shed light to the tools I need to clean up my mental space. a clear amount of eloquence in your words.

[@georgestamatakis9601]

Hope you're doing well!

[@ryangoetz2292]

Video quality is a huge step up and makes a big difference! If the sound issue was fixed this would be one of the better quality lectures I've seen on youtube.

[@Second247]

For me it low level of volume which is main problem in Jordan's videos and this is even worse then old ones. Quality for me has not been issue, but i wonder how many phones can provide enough volume to make this understandable. Even my stereo system has to be cranked up to level which i think is unnecessaryly high.

[@luzm1039]

Love this lecture. Sheds some light or darkness.lol on all those who want to awake the masses for us all to live in Utopia. Fascinated as always.

[@naomiferguson2010]

I read several of Solzhenitsyn's book 10-15 years ago including the Gulag Archipelago. At the time and to this day I am also appalled that no one seems to care! Occasionally with friends, i'll bring up how many deaths Stalin or Pol Pot caused, or what communism really amounts to, and no one knows or cares what I'm referring to. Its refreshing to hear you speak about these atrocities in your lectures. Thank you.

[@christiandoscher1016]

When you say communism is that synonymous with Marxism? I often hear your complaint from others in different arguments and responses from people who seem to like Marxism which I really know little about, but have an impression of, is that the system wasn't, pardon the pun, executed properly and was a corrupt form of the ideas. Jordan emphasizes the importance of honesty from citizens about their experiences of life and I would say the same must go for the problems in capitalistic US where I live. Corruption is rampant here but compared to what,yet. Can the frogs ever really tell the point at which they must leap from the warming waters. You are right of course or I agree that too many people don't know of the major mass sufferings in history though I don't think they don't care. For some and it frustrates me too, people can't bare the negativity and maybe superstitiously believe they can make it go away or not attract it by thinking about it. On the other hand the Holocaust is blockbuster theme and seems to be desensitizing or leading audiences to be relieved it was just a German /Jewish problem fomenting an exceptionalism in younger jewish culutre. Overall I find Jordan's initial intro to his goal of understanding these horrors and their relation to what he speaks of as existential debt in terms of what we owe to others suffering afar, or what we can do about it through protest or other various means we take on , important for him to return more to in his contextualization of his lectures. I get his basic, find you're own way honestly approach , but wonder if we can do that to the extent that we can get very far before the worlds we live in cave in for other reason that have to be addressed in form of revolutionary groups wether violent or not. I know he is working hard to help is students be good actors in life, but his psych approach seems idealistic and designed to help people cope with that existential debt crisis that can be so distracting from being successful in a mainstream way. For me I struggle with these themes and he certainly has put it into words quite well which is helpful at least to move forward etc. Sorry this is a bit dense of reply. Best.

[@jukkapenttinen4132]

Marx never wrote how communism or socialism would work in practice he was mostly analyzer of capitalism.

[@naomiferguson2010]

I think there's such a tendency in people to think we can make a 'utopian society'. I don't mean only in the form of communism or socialism, I mean any kind of forced type of society-- one that doesn't develop naturally. of course a society that develops naturally is full of problems too, but I think it contains fundamentally more freedom, and I see that as the far better choice. Its incredibly difficult, if not impossible, for humans to grasp that we can't create a 'perfect' anything, we can't even come close lol.

[@naomiferguson2010]

I haven't studied Marx well but it does seem the smart people who have, find a close link to him and socialism/communism. I doubt that has no valid basis.

[@naomiferguson2010]

my understanding of Marxism, bolshevism, and communism, is that they're very similar but I'm sure there are differences. I have read articles and books where the author states that communism was a failure but then goes on to basically say " if only they had done it this way....". I don't believe there's any possible way human beings could ever make communism work in a way that was good for all and not oppressive. I just think we're so driven by basic instincts that we could never get it right, so to speak. I know most of us fight our baser feelings and try to act compassionately but when push comes to shove, as it always does in governing, our base instincts would always ruin it.

[@SisterDanger]

"Rather have interesting trouble, than non-interesting perfection." perhaps because contrast is necessary to avoid death by stagnation, as a species.

[@limitless1692]

Brilliant lecture , interesting full of useful information And i learned a bit of history because of this Thank you very much sir :)

[@anthonydavinci7985]

This is an Amazing Lecture among many exceptional confluences of thought...How profoundly useful and is why I call this gift of an intellect ,,''''''PETERSON THE MAGNIFICENT '''''''

[@Daimo83]

I hope there was raucous applause afterwards that got edited out. Another fantastic lecture, thank you.

[@LennonnJohn]

You jordan are a hero.

[@BlackBeltMonkeySong]

Great talk.

[@propjam2]

that was brilliant

[@samchop7494]

I've learned so much through criticism triggered by me saying something foolish. To undermine peoples ability to learn while living is cruel and unusual.

[@martinburrows6844]

Wow. 🤯 . See you on Tuesday.

[@lidu6363]

Your lecture is bringing up very important question... Why is that unlike nacism, communism has never been outlawed, and many people today still claim to be communist, with no shame and no consequence? Well that's because communism has never been really overthrown. The "peaceful revolution" that happened in Europe was mostly a charade to make the communist give up the official power, but giving them very compensating posts in the background... They never disappeared. Many of them are coming back to power (big thanks to socialist supermachination called the European Union), all with the pretense of "helping people". One of the scariest examples is our country's (Czech Republic) minister of finance, who owns and/or has major influence on Czech media, while owning the largest agriculture company and many more things... And yes, he has a history being Comminist Party's State Security's 'secret agent'. How can this be happening in front of everyone's eyes?!

[@DivingDonut]

I wonder the same. First there was the Tscheka under Lenin. And when the name changed to NKVD, everybody knew it was the same organisation. They even acted out of the same house, the Lubjanka, in which thousands of people were killed. When that name changed to KGB, everybody knew this was the same organisation. And still in the same house. And then the Soviet Union alledgedly fell. And the KGB became the FSB. Acting from their Headquarter, the Lubjanka, still. And now people want to tell me Russia has changed? They didnt even change the building they executed people in for their secret service.

[@BrettonFerguson]

Communism has killed 300 million people in the 20th century. They targeted people because of their race and deported entire races to Siberia. The reason Nazism is so vilified and Communism isn't, is because there are many Communist sympathizers in the west. In Universities, the media, and in the government. They cover for Communist crimes while talking incessantly about Nazi crimes. One group goes through every Wikipedia article and edits it to minimize communist atrocities. One example is Stalin's White Sea-Baltic Canal. Alexander Solzhenitsyn said 300,000 died during it's construction. Historyaccess.com says 60,000 to 200,000 died. Maxim Gorky says 100,000 died. Wikipedia say only 15,000 died. Another example is Dresden, while it was perpetrated by the British and Americans during WWII, they want everything black and white. All Germans were evil Nazis, all Allies were the good guys. The allies dropped 8000 Tons of bombs on 3 Million civilians, Wikipedia says there was only 1.6 million civilians. But we can use 1.6 million. 8000 tons, or 16 million pounds of bombs dropped on 1.6 million civilians. Wikipedia says only between 15,000 and 25,000 died, and other higher figures are Nazi Propaganda. First do the math drop 16 million pounds of bombs on at least 1.6 million people, that is 10 pounds of explosives per person, does it make sense for only 15,000 to 25,000 to die? If that's true, every 1000 pounds killed 1 person, in an overcrowded city full of refugees. Then look at the higher figures. The Neutral Swiss Red cross, who also brought food and medicine to allied prisoners captured by the Germans, they went to Dresden after it was bombed and estimated 350,000 civilians died. Kurt Vonnegut Jr. was in Dresden when it was bombed, he said 300,000 died and he personally helped remove 100,000 bodies just from basements and cellars. Wikipedia claims the Red cross, Kurt Vonnegut, and other witnesses's figures are just Nazi Propaganda. You can go into Wikipedia and link citations proving what the truth is. These groups will come back and delete your numbers and delete your citations. Changing them back to 15,000

[@lidu6363]

Bretton Ferguson Thank you for your answer! I am utterly disgusted. See, we still have the same teachers in the schools who teached our parents during the communist regime, so one might understand why the horrors of communism are not emphasized more. But those who read Orwell's 1984 can put two and two together. And I am horrified how far can the influence of socialist/communist propaganda reach. Hopefully the next generation will not be so easily manipulated in the world of _fact relativism._

[@psyfiles5310]

because people do not understand communism as always entailing an extreme dictatorship.

[@xblackcatx1312]

Is he a jew? I'd wager he is. I'm curious now.

[@adelghbech6409]

is really great knowledge and very trusted for truth!like what is sayng!But you're defining actually the evil .And I would agree that huge difference of acting that you can find iin this world is just ....So carry on.You got the thinks

[@mrunixman1579]

I think I have it too due to way I look at things.

[@danilthorstensson8902]

6:00 Pyotr Stephanovich and his group were the totalitarian thinkers. Stavrogin was the quasi-Nietzschean self-sufficient Superman, but in the sense that he believed in nothing (specifically didn't believe in Orthodox Christianity) and therefore had no moral system stopping him from committing atrocities. He's similar to Raskolnikov in that way.

[@existentialexplorations4900]

Thank you for more on existentialism Professor Peterson. Just a suggestion. I think it would be really useful in these talks to say a bit more about the third alternative to the loss of an interpretive framework. I know this is a theme running through all your work but I just thought it would be really helpful for your listeners to hear it in the midst of the existential ideas. I would also like to hear more on how Kierkegaard may fit in with the other existentialists. I like the notion of existential authenticity as a elixir to totalitarianism. Kierkegaard may have a bit to say about this. The question you raise about why hardly anyone has heard about the damage caused by leftist dogmas is also appreciated. I know people who have no idea who Stalin is. I don't know if they just don't study history at school or if history isn't taught so well these days. It was very leftist when I came through but at least it was noted that not all was well with communism. From memory The Killing Fields was one movie that dealt with this issue. But your right, it's almost always fascist Germany that gets held up as the one great evil of the twentieth century.

[@shodanxx]

At 24:44 I think you touch on the very crux of the matter. You say, at issue is the belief that the owner class has basically stolen everything they own from the workers and that's denying that some work is more valuable than other and not relative to the effort it takes to accomplish. Now I have to put that in perspective with my situation of working in a large corporation. A corporation that gives me a pretty good deal as far as my job is concerned, but that then claims ownership to all my intellectual property including whatever I come up with at home and for one year after I quit the company. That's the real problem. Companies put employees in a situation where they can soak up all profits and improvements off the workers and in exchange only give out as little as they can. With all companies working this way there is no other option to turn to. We are condemned to having employer rig the game so they always win and there's not a damn thing we can do about it. I'm not going to start my own aircraft engine company on my own, whatever I do (other than checkout from society) I will have to give according to my full abilities and get as little as I need. This is the same bullshit system as the soviet, except we're in better shape because of the economic head start we had from having our industry intact after world war two. There is just as much room for getting worked like slaves under our system as there was under the soviet system. It's just a matter of how much productivity creating how much resource and how much we have to give the peasant so that they won't overthrow everything. And with the extreme levels of automation that are coming, we're going to have a large part of the population with nothing to do. They're very existence will have no use for our system, what do you think will happen then ? Maybe they'll all become artists ? AH! Our clock is ticking and I hope you have a good answer on how to avoid having to taste our own brand of totalitarianism before it runs out.

[@ayyleeuz4892]

to fix the audio fix you can enable mono in windows 10 ease of access settings

[@NickBultman]

My left ear loved this cideo

[@adelghbech6409]

This man has my trust after watching this!Hope nobody will get offended....

[@lizellevanwyk5927]

like millions of srangers, I love you. ❤

[@upsidedown4734]

"The most advantageous Adnvantage."

[@TheJojoaruba52]

As he says, most people don’t know who Solzhenitsyn is and don’t understand that we are repeating history.

[@themistoklischristou9372]

1:02:56 Actually the paragraph that Dr. Peterson read was from the book Man's Search For Meaning by Victor E. Frankl

[@MOLOTOV_1991]

?

[@jesterfrombeyond1776]

I love how Peterson used to have a can of soda with him in every lecture back in the day.

[@djjohnnypl]

I am wondering if Prof. Peterson is familiar with the work of Ludwig von Mises. Around the 50:00 mark it sounds like Misesian argument about impossibility of economy functioning without prices established on the marketplace.

[@AntonDoesMusic]

40:22 This is a moment for anyone who says "Jordan Peterson is more postmodern than the people he espouses." You can have "your" truth and still be wrong about it. The postmodern argument is that you can have a truth and no one can tell you you're wrong.

[@LipsCollide]

A Scottish viewer would be deeply offended by the assertion that Adam Smith was English.

[@mandeqjama5414]

Just an honest mistake

[@RolfHartmann]

Tom Bombadil He probably picked that up from English people/books who often mistakenly use the terms English and British interchangably. I once had a professor born in England who had to appologize a few times for making that mistake.

[@lgbrown3820]

Dr. Peterson, Around 56:00, you talk about the prevalance of lying [by omission or otherwise] as a part of the engine that oppressed the Soviet population - and at the same time, allowed the cycle itself to continue. Do you have any thoughts about an analagous prevalence in modern western culture? Though it isn't as dire in consequence as in the Soviet era, it does seem like speaking against, for example, the dark realities of the United States' foreign policy actions is a gross violation of the social contract. We have "free press" that doesn't discuss it seriously and "free speech" that's often met with hostility or dismissal in all but the most careful company. Do you agree that these are analagous concepts? If so, do you have any thoughts on, perhaps, this type of nationalist related self-delusion being a 'normal' part of the human evolution/experience for many people? Thanks for sharing your ideas publicly. The world needs a lot more of this.

[@summondadrummin2868]

So far Jordan in listening Im going to guess your not versed in the critique of the monetary system which has been around for a long time but has gained greater visibility in the modern era. The basic idea it seems asks how can we engineer the inner workings of the monetary system to create a more balanced and healthy free enterprise model. See Positive Money as one example.

[@shodanxx]

Does anyone know the link to the next video in what appears to be a series ?

[@crossfarm4146]

Why does this only have 49k views?

[@dynamicdan7888]

Love the video quality but the occasional camera movement started to give me a headache

[@brucekern7083]

The man, the conscious man, the fully conscious and alive man, the commander-in-chief, the true man within pressing without, the natural man, whose basest instincts dance upon his surface, surging through in forthright command, neither disguised nor cloaked in shame, nor saddled by guilt, that wanton weapon of the pitiful masses, that man of truth guiding his way, hardly flinching, nor hesitating, nor inwardly conflicting, his only distinction abiding in the residium of conflict, where conflict resides "out there," never "in here," so that assurance retains the mark of precision, and the hammer of conquest strikes upon flesh-bound enemies, true and worthy, the feasting instincts, the broiling instincts, the raging instincts, which take the audacious form of his innermost creative prowess and pound their way ineluctably into the whole world set before him, the world is his canvass, and on it he pounds his enemies into submission, pounding on himself as a pinnacle of magnificence, pounding with the hammer of truth, the hammer of shameless authenticity, deep in the cloud of debris, the debris of shame, the debris of regret, each flake of remorse falling, falling slowly as though weightless and gentle, falling gently, ever so gently, to settle upon the floor, to reveal that glorious form, that spectacle of glory, that precious Self, its radiant truth shining forth in full conscious bloom, the suffering termites having been swept away in a tempest of consuming rage, that rage of all rages, of rigor and vitality, that creative rage, that consuming rage, that rage which creates by consuming away all superfluity, all useless inessentials, till the essence of Man breaks forth in complete splendour, till all consuming rage gulps down all that was and ever will be, and nothing remains but a burb of nothingness, till his soul walks out on stage like a nude exhibitionist, and there is no want of integrity between thoughts and deeds, and self-assured certainty is seated upon his rightful throne, and the viper of deceit is vanquished, for with what venom does she beguile and seduce, and carry away, with what stealth does she whisper her cunning, does she crawl and sneak upon reptilian feet, with scales of smooth caramel skin, enticing the blind fools, whose eyes dilate and whose tongues wag and drool, like cobras enchanted and transfixed by the flute of fluttering lashes, creeping silent through dark allies, spinning webs garnished with alluring enticements, the timorous gaze from behind those shy eyes, the dainty steps, the trail of ardour left lingering in her wake, as a fragrant aroma, yet with what spontaneity, with what marvelous ferocity does she mutate, in an instant, as though patience had crumbled and could withstand no more, as though the crushing weight of taboo could no longer sustain, consumed by embers of impassioned narcosis, possessed and ravished by masculine demons, demonic masculinity, her own hidden masculinity, whose autonomous heads break violently away from her own, who break forth from her tongue, their grotesque heads smashing with violent frenzy from behind the glass of her pretty eyes, like serpentine hatchlings, pregnant with malice, the beast of her beauty, whose charms are a lull for Leviathin slumbering in her breasts, when the soft contours of her visage meets the pillow, there he awakens, and multiplies speedily, and they in their manifold numbers explore curiously the terrain of inscrutable innocence, like langourous tongues of fire slithering surreptitiously through exits of self-negated passions, howling and caged in taboo, in a moment of sight, this sight, this sight to behold, this sight within pressing more without, this insight--smelted and molten and pounded vainly in diverse forms afresh, as though wreathing out into pointed fangs streaming from her head, she hides well but remains ever so faintly revealed, buried behind thick layers of blindness, like the soft glow of a lunar eclipse, begging to be conquered, and always succeeding, whether by force or by intrigue, her conquest is always that of being conquered...

[@ingold1470]

Sounds like an ubermensch.

[@mariog1490]

I was taught that existentialism is a philosophy that says existence proceeds essence. Am I wrong?

[@h0ust0nwehaveapr0blem]

How can i find the book about Stalin professor Peterson refers to?

[@jonase.4144]

Professor, I think you are confusing the characters in The Possessed. Pjotr Stepanowitsch and his followers turn to totalitarianism, but Stawrogin definitely does not. He does not think about society as a whole at all, and is only concerned with his personal problems. Other than that, great lecture!

[@az222881]

I thought Pol Pot was responsible for approx. 1.5 million deaths.

[@theroguetomato1]

Dr.Peterson, Is it fair to suggest that if left-wingers engage more with mercy and right-wingers are justice seeking (according to your use of a phrase by Jung in another video), then as a result of the many technological innovations in the past century and the way the positive half of technology has been sold to us all of our lives, we no longer feel a strong need for justice with our padded walls and screens keeping each other at a distance? So then left-wing ideological thought would be more tempting to hold on to. In part just by the way that communications technology isolates at an intimate level to connect us together at a broader one.

[@eggrollXXXM]

I'm unable to access the Psy230H homepage - 404 Server Error Any advice?

[@malpais776]

You might have to go to the University of Toronto and buy a ticket. :) :) :)

[@MsCristea]

Belomor canal...

[@Getit_gotit_good]

Holy Rusted Advertisement Interruptions Batman..

[@jman2697]

is it human anomaly? are the worst type of people cowards? cowards in the sense of they cannot face themselves and as bollas says turn to revolutionary ideologies to try and fix the gamut of basic faults? people have been given the opportunity now to express themselves freely... this is hope...

[@Dioleate]

Pol Pot was estimated to kill between 1.5 - 3 million people, not 6 million. Cambodia had a population of little over 7 million when the Khmer Rouge took control in 1975. Notably Pol Pot has been quoted as saying that Democratic Kampuchea would require no more than 2 million surviving citizens to operate as a worker's paradise as planned.

[@SlayerO013]

I was taught nothing of what happened in Russia, Cambodia, or China in school. I first found out about these attempted utopias as well as Turkey,Rwanda, and Uganda when I was looking into the grand idea of gun control and all of the lovely times and places it was so very "successful" in the past. I guess success is measured by how many piles of dead unarmed citizens one with governmental power can produce and how high they can make those piles. Peaceful utopian Mao Zedong's words of infinite wisdom.... "All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party." What could possibly go wrong?

[@noshowerforweeks797]

thought my right ear was dead for a second.

[@willhelmberkly3025]

Long Russian winter = Long Russian novel

[@BigRed4231]

I always tell the truth, even if I tell white lies it affects my psyche in negative ways. To be truthful to others is the only way to be truly truthful to yourself. To accept yourself you need to be truthful to yourself, and self-acceptance, and a good moral sense, is - I would say - the most important thing for good mental health. I work on self-acceptance all the time, it is self-acceptance wish initiates the metamorphosis of seemingly bad qualities, to good qualities. Sometimes it is your worst qualities that will - when worked - turn out to be your best qualities. I will admit though, my truthfulness has ruined quite a few first dates.

[@Macheako]

Rince wind I agree with absolutely everything you say. It's fucking awesome to see somebody else articulate that honesty is more than a mere convenience, it's a bloody necessity lol. And fuck those first dates haha, you probably saved yourself from weeks and weeks of having to deal with fake ass women bud ;) Seriously, people will spend years in clearly "wrong" relationships because they lack the courage to be honest.

[@SPIRITTIGER14]

From each according to their ability to each according to their need ... needs tend to be quite basic. I don't think it was ever implemented properly anywhere ... it was usually corrupted ... but look at Cuba they train doctors from all over the world for free only with the agreement that they will serve poor populations ... I think that works ... the other thing ... the system we live under causes a great deal of harm ... one thing I can tell you is that a drug company does not "need" to hike the price of an epi-pen 400 percent. To each and from each -- could definitely be used as a guide line .... not the end all and be all ... but as a guide line it works well. Maybe it is just common sense ...

[@coletrain2357]

Marxists couldn't convince Americans to let them seize the "means of production" directly, so they convinced them to seize the means of production in indirect ways to varying degrees (from "regulation", to "subsidization", and in some cases complete indirect monopolization of entire industries). The economic arguments that justify all this are completely fallacious, the most crucial of all of them being this idea of a "natural monopoly". It's a completely unfounded idea based in circular logic, which points to what are obviously state-backed monopolies and calls them "natural". The epi-pen issue just another example of this kind of lie about the so-called faults of supposedly free markets. The United States has been an extremely collectivist society for most of the 20th century, and it had begun the process of collectivization in the 19th century. It was simply more resistant to it. So whatever "capitalism" is, it certainly doesn't have anything to do with free markets and voluntary exchange between individuals.... it's more like diet communism. The most important thing to understand is that Marxists are not evil in a conspiratorial sense, although there might be some of that going on. On the contrary they started with good intentions like most humans, but are simply blinded to their own faulty logic because Marxism (and all other forms of collectivism) are motivated by fear. This is an example of why the Indian philosopher Jiddu Krishnamurti argued that fear is the root of all evil.

[@SPIRITTIGER14]

From what I recall of my readings and class -- it was about workers not being exploited by industrialization -- where many modern so called communist countries have gone wrong is that the government run all of the companies and exploits the workers just the same. Marx talked about the difference between selling your labour power or directly selling a product of your own labour. He didn't like people working in Candle factories ... but he had no problem with a candle maker selling their own product directly. Much of that had to do with social implications -- there was direct contact between the maker and buyer, relationship -- people were not alienated. It wasn't just about money or the rich versus the poor it was about people connecting directly. I mean if the president of the epi pen company sold directly to each family that needed the product .. I bet their heart might get touched by those who could not afford this life saving product. If that makes any sense to you. So Marxism as far as I am aware was against monopolies ... and monopolies are easily created in an environment where individuals can amass large amounts of personal wealth. Our current huge appetite for consumer goods seems can only be satisfied by mass production often produced in 3rd world countries where people endure horrid working and living standards. Then we complain here we don't have any good jobs -- but we still get by because we can consume cheap goods at the cost of another's health and welfare. I wonder how the world would work ... if we just traded goods instead of using money -- currency screws over lots of third world nations. I mean if everyone bought their clothes directly from those factory workers in Bangledesh .. you can be damn sure that we would want to make sure they got their fair share of the profit. People seem to forget that Marxism was very social ... it was a philosophy ... not an economic system. It's just those that got a hold of it and implemented it ... twisted the crap out of it. Just like Religious Fanatics twist the crap out of what ever religion they happen to be fanatical about ....

[@coletrain2357]

Spirit Tiger The poverty and harsh work conditions of the average person that Marx saw was the product of his own kind of thinking. People exactly like him caused it. Marx didn't understand how wealth was created, he was just another man who kept asking the wrong question "Why are some people so poor?" when the real question is "Why does anyone have anything?". "it was a philosophy ... not an economic system." You can not separate these two things, how we perceive the world will always dictate our actions. For followers of collectivist ideas like marxism, it will inevitably lead them down the road to hell. "monopolies are easily created in an environment where individuals can amass large amounts of personal wealth." Monopolies are NOT a product of wealth or income inequality, they are a product of the state. They are ironically a product of the state's attempt to prevent monopolies. This is why I say marxism is nothing more than circular logic. Consider the possibility that the only way to eliminate POVERTY is to reject the idea that wealth necessarily gives you power over other peoples lives. Marxism is the very process of creating a market for power over other people's lives. The only thing that gives you power over other peoples live is control over socially legitimized violence (the state), and the state can always be BOUGHT OFF. The problem is not the wealth inequality, but the existence of the state! Any attempt to create equality of wealth will require the existence of some kind of state, and will ironically prevent us from eliminating poverty. We can either live in a world without poverty, or we can continue to try and make people more equal, but we can't have it both. " if we just traded goods instead of using money -- currency screws over lots of third world nations." I don't even know where to begin here. I'll just remind you that I am in no way defending the status-quo where the state dictates what people can use as money (fiat currency, fiat meaning "by decree"). Show a little hubris, recognize what seems most real from the perception of common sense. The places which were most resistant to collectivist ideas like marxism also coincidentally became the most wealthy. This INCLUDES European countries like Sweden, which were very much based in free markets up until the 1970s. Marxists have come up with all sorts of excuses for this, all of which are based on fallacious prepositions. The socialism of today in Europe is simply a luxury paid for by the previous decades of freedom, but it is completely unsustainable and will only make things worse in the long run.

[@SPIRITTIGER14]

Sorry .. but when I read what you write -- I get the impression that you have no idea of what you are talking about -- seriously -- total ignorance -- I could even understand and respect what Ayn Rand wrote -- even if I disagreed with some of it .. but honestly -- you could be a robot writing this -- it has no train of thought to it what so ever maybe you are writing with a lack of soul or heart -- I don't know but something is certainly missing. So You can respond if you like ... but I am choosing not to talk to someone who is not coming off with any sense of clarity.

[@tiagovasc]

47:00

[@jman2697]

oh it was religion that was shifted from.... had to go back to the beginning of the video to understand what was going on haha

[@deepstrasz]

From some comments here and for those who deem Marxism as something misused, Mr. Peterson should do a Das Kapital series and objectify how the things therein are in fact prone to abuse.

[@jman2697]

alright so I'm starting to recognise the patterns in your lectures, especially when it comes to object relation and meaning. the hypodermic needle example is where i paused the video because this is basically what youve been saying the whole time. somehow everything fell appart, nietzsche predicted this and then new ideologies came in to replace that. half of it was communist and the other half wasnt. the meaning crisis so to speak? and with the meaning crisis in place communism swept the world. what brought about the crisis in meaning? individual basic flaws? economic circumstances? perhaps a reaction to the flaws of the people at the top of the hierarchy collumns? take the tsar for example?

[@mandeqjama5414]

I'm at minute 55 right now and it honestly feels like you've spent the last hour just talking smack about 20th century socialism, rather than existentialism to be honest.

[@3377ftw]

perhaps watch the whole video

[@jmoreno6150]

not really

[@Rison1337]

Perhaps putting socialism in its place of murderous philosophies has a direct link to expanding thoughts about existentialism. But I suspect socialist lunatics like yourself dont understand unpacking things and seeing them for what they truly are.

[@Alphacentauri819]

I think there are links in there to existentialism. You have to understand what drives evolution in ideas. He’s explaining how people took this idea, idealized it without enough real planning, forethought and the consequences were unbelievable. I’m glad to hear it all tied together.

[@DavidVargasS]

Incredible how Jordan talks about Putin’s power 5 years before the conflict in Ukraine. He knows how to read history very well.

[@sina8883]

I don’t know about the moral he draws at the very end about existentialists and the state. Sartre was mortified about the French who collaborated with the Nazis. He felt that ultimate moral responsibility lay with the individual, and those who shirked that responsibility in favor of anything else, including the state, were acting in “bad faith”. He condemned that. Don’t get me wrong. I like Peterson and enjoy listening to many of his talks.. I am no philosopher myself, but I think by foraying into philosophy as a psychologist, he may be out of his depth.

[@firewiss]

This talk is part Existentialism, part dangers of Communism, Collectivism.

[@theonetojump]

My left ear enjoyed this...

[@pepehands4492]

how much did coka cola pay to have that can placed on that podium

[@phainesthai9095]

C UNextTuesday

[@TopHatKitty]

Do you ever think about North Korea? I'd like to hear a talk about that.

[@alyshafleming6559]

If there is one thing I have learned from these videos, it is that Dr. Peterson loves Coke products.

[@notsureifthisisserious]

60 below?

[@nicolasdelgadolozano7890]

26:40

[@nathanconroy1838]

@Jordan B Peterson -- Could you produce shorter videos on essential psychology topics? I'd like to share your thought with friends, but it's hard for most to invest in hour-long videos.

[@nathanconroy1838]

Awesome!

[@jacksonlenhartmusic]

I must say I'm disappointed to see the Coke Zero. Fantastic talk otherwise :)

[@aligaterman275]

Let the poor man get his rocks off

[@Alphacentauri819]

Maybe it’s an opportunity for you to evaluate why? What’s your narrative with it? Are you over-idealizing a man who despite his brilliance, has human vices? I think Coke Zero is toxic, however I also can zoom out and not project things onto him about it. I can also see areas of imperfection or toxic choices in my life, so I only can work on that...vs nitpicking a man, focusing on a small negative in comparison to his incredible immeasurable positive impacts. Would be worried to be your friend or partner...wouldn’t feel free to just be.

[@noelletham7275]

What's with these weird close ups of his hands?

[@Starius2]

deff looks better with a beard

[@summondadrummin2868]

Marx presented an untenable model but his theories were it appears the primary model of leftist professors and why? Whereas reformers like Silvio Gesell and Henry George who ideas are way more useful and still are were ignored even Keynes said he hopes the world learns more from the spirit of Gesell than Marx.In a expansionist mindset though where you need a menacing enemy and Marxism provided a great polarity because even though his ideas weren't ultimately workable they still inspired people to great effort so immense expenditures of militarism could be rolled out to defeat the necessary evil. Look up the ideas of Silvio Gesell and Henry George.

[@adelghbech6409]

But what that there are dudes ,that will love a guy that knows just a few words,and hit and repuls an guy that is normal ,free opend minded,Cause actually they find they selfes to support thinks like this because of their superficiality that can't make them go furhter,and actually what you're sayng is so truE THE facts told by the comunists. by you.Ohter i don't know exactly

[@squirtlent]

I think I’m a this ?!

[@BrettonFerguson]

I like the beard. More men should grow beards. Not ISIS beards, at least comb them. Just regular Occidental Beards.

[@valueundefined8368]

Excellent video. If anyone is interested I do a series on YT about philosophy quotes. If anyone is interested take a look.

[@Luanne_Ashe]

I'm glad you shaved again. grizzled is not your best "look". ;)

[@xxxxxboxfan]

RIP headphone users

[@nwmonk3105]

This isn't about existentialism at all. It's about the evils of collectivism and socialism.

[@Alphacentauri819]

Could it be that existentialism arose out of the realms of socialism? Stimulated by its ills and lack of foresight? Beliefs systems often arise in response to such things. Always there is stimulus which propels evolution forward.

[@adelghbech6409]

OKAY.YOU'RE PUTTING BOTH COMUNIST AND NATZI IN THE SAME PLATE .YOU DON'T AGREE ONLY THIS ISSUE AT NATZIS OR YOU'ER TOTALLY AGAINST IN THEIR IDEOLOGY,

[@shodanxx]

I'm at 17:47 and this is great but I think this talk would be better if it built up to "Stalin was a monster, communism killed everyone" rather than by starting by it like some 2 bit politician calling his opponent "COMMUNIST !" and then enumerating all the crimes of communism. First establish what communism is, then point out the flaws (communism doesn't define needs and abilities, the people in charge systematically get it wrong because they only consider the interests of the state not of the individual) and THEN you give out your laundry list of crimes against humanity by communism and plug the gulag book. When you do it in the wrong order, it sounds like capitalist propaganda which just detracts from otherwise your excellent message. I know it's tempting to start with "I am not a communism, before I start here are 10 reasons why I think Stalin was a meany head" so that people don't just dismiss you as a dirty bearded marxist and then return to their reality show but I think you should give some credit to people who have clicked on a video just labelled "Existentialism Talk"

[@jman2697]

wheres the freaken sound mate

[@Booogieman]

Even some smart people make terrible choices. For example, i often see dr. Jordan drink aspartame-cola.

[@andriusbendikas9117]

Cola (with aspartame) is not a terrible choice for anyone. Aspartame is FDA approved, one the most tested non-nutritive sweeteners. It is as safe as anything in this world can get. Upon request, the studies can be provided. Contrary to the popular belief, it can have weight loss benefits, though indirect (through satisfying cravings for example). I agree with the first claim, though. Even smart make terrible choices.

[@christiandoscher1016]

I've heard it was poisonous from many sources too, aspartame and was pushed through by FDA nefariously by people who had stake in it's sale and pull in the FDA. Question here is, have we a system we can trust anymore? Is our science based critique impervious to fascism and how would we know it? Do think there is something exceptional about the science community not it's ideals but the reality they must practice under in getting funding for studies etc and the pressure to conform or pursue projects to prop up corporate needs of clearance? There seems little room for dissent when a scientist can't really function well with out funding and that I"ve heard get's pulled rather quickly when people don't tow the line. Just some thoughts or impressions. back to aspartame I wouldn't risk it as I notice it right away in my system and don't like the effects. I prefer fruit for sweets and promote natural foods or unprocessed sugar etc. I see now there isn't even any gum without it wether "sugar free"or not you can't buy candy or much without it in it.

[@sneekgeekgaming8366]

aspartame is extremely toxic. the fda approves all kinds of toxic garbage.

[@Honsoku]

No, aspartame is not extremely toxic. The tests that suggested that were conducted by force feeding animals aspartame in quantities that were a significant portion of their bodyweight. Quantities that a normal person will not come even close to with regular consumption. Now before you go "Aha! You said the studies showed that if you eat enough of it, it is poisonous, therefore it is poisonous", everything is harmful to you if consumed in great enough quantity. As the saying goes; it is the dosage that makes the poison. Aspartame is just another in a long line of health scares perpetuated by people that were more concerned with a good headline than good information.

[@BradNesseth]

Shot with good cameras, not color corrected. Also, audio not post fixed. Deal with it.

[@shodanxx]

At 20:25 you ask, do you know about the Ukraine famine (the holomodor). Here you seem to be putting that on the shoulder of communism, but it was genocide, it was intended to purge this border region the soviet empire of ukrainians and then replace them with russians. A very common theme in russian history as far as I can tell (and probably the history of the world, localized genocide appears to have been the default treatment of peoples defeated in war.) That's all really a geopolitical problem, Moscow is exposed by plains and they want to have as much buffer as possible between them and the rest of europe. That's why they also keep all those economically non-viable cities between Moscow and Siberia alive, they're the escape route for the next war. It's also the reason for the genocides in the caucasus. Suppression of internal dissent to consolidate their basically royal power. It's a continuation of feudalism at an industrial scale. You then cite Solzhenitsyn as an authority on the body count of the Maoist horrors after saying we don't know. Like how would he know any better, he wasn't in a position to know about the Chinese brand of totalitarianism. And then you put the western intellectual community on trial for being communist apologists and that they should apologize ? I think you're off the track here mister ! How could they apologize, what does that even mean ? Should they embrace capitalist totalitarianism for a couple decade as an apology to rich people everywhere ? I hope I get to the part where you chastise europe for it's capitalist totalitarianist crimes of colonialism and slavery pretty quick. I think honestly you are at risk of the same ideological blind spot toward our economic system as you accuse 'western intelligentsia' of having toward communism.

[@PublickStews]

The argument made at 14:00 is a pretty bad misreading of anything Marx said about religion. In the "opium of the masses" passage in the Contribution to a Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right, Marx never says it's a conspiracy. In that passage, religion is a genuine expression of suffering. I have never, in reading 4000 pages of Marx, seen any statement that religion is a conspiracy by elites. Also, Marx was not a socialist theorist. He probably wrote less than 10 pages in his life about what socialism would look like, so I'm a bit puzzled how you extrapolate several minutes about it.

[@ECL1PSEEEE]

If he is so dogmatic and prone to error due to his biases, it shouldn't be too hard to provide some good counterarguments to his claims.

[@blabla44549]

I would guess he was referring to Lenin's famous interpretation of Marx's statement about religion. Marx himself said it is the reaction to real world suffering, a metaphor he himself borrowed from Heine. And he said the existence of religion is the result of a deficit in the structure of the state and he also viewed the US system as the concluded emancipation of state from church, where people could be religious without it impacting the matters of state; both of which is obviously nonsense, so I'm not sure why what he said about religion would even be relevant to the lecturer. Should stick to Nietzsche, a lot more substance and insight to be found there. I didn't understand the lecturer to have meant that Marx was a socialist theorist, Marx wasn't even a Marxist - even an outspoken opponent of the term and ideology (the part of it that had already developed when he was still alive, that is) - and the lecturer's whole tantrum is clearly about the doctrine of Marxism and the dire consequences of its real life application. It is undeniable that all real world applications of Marxism or its derivatives had some version of Marx&Engels desired end to the famed base-superstructure posit and/or the communal property of production factors at their very core, I imagine that and the frequent usage of Marx by basically every self proclaimed leftist dictator ever is what he tried to convey.

[@ExistentialWill]

So, like, when is he gonna engage with Existentialist material huh? He just chatters and chatters with ideological prejudice, and Kierkegaard has a lot to say about chattering bourgeois. He's useless and resentful.

[@h0ust0nwehaveapr0blem]

Please argue your way in. Don't just throw insults. It is pathetic.