Jordan Peterson - My Intellectual Journey With Richard Dawkins

[@Liberty-Vault]

Do you think Jordan Peterson and Richard Dawkins have finally found common ground? For more liberty clips, subscribe to my channel and click the bell!

[@singmicro14]

According to my research, when Professor JP is claiming that religion must be wholly replaced, not only critiqued; he is harkening to Derrida's Theory of Deconstruction and its insistence that an object undergoing Deconstruction enters the phases of the Double Science: Overturning and Displacement. JP please let me know if you concur..

[@StankHunt42]

No I do not concur

[@TanSpeakersCorner]

Going into meditation route is also a sign of just leading self, focusing only on problem one can solve because of too many problems in the world. Like that old cliche in saying “be the change you want to be”. Basically there is always two sides to a story, if we only be the change we want to be, it will be an introvert world which is like the difference between West vs East. Fundamentally philosophy of spirituality and governance of the East (historical China) is quite introvert while the West is quite extrovert which is why they have change the world through Age of Enlightenment etc but it also change nothing in the end because everything come back to the same question. In recent years (last 20 years) there is a sudden rise in eastern religion is partly due to the rise of tech work which is introvert by nature so I can see why. For me, there needs to be a balance approach that is not too pretentious and can move the needle.

[@ThoughtCriminal_1984]

Part of the problem is you're ( Jordan, I mean ) confused about power, who controls the strings and the stories you're such an ardent fan of.

[@hangtime1111]

These People talk in circle everytime ,all with a high education and no real skill in life telling us how smart they are thinking about nothing that matters

[@arm6075]

That was kind of the case before but JP's discussions with atheism approaches from a refreshing new angle. Instead of debating zealots on whether the bible is literally true, he speaks from sociological and symbolic points of view, which is what I always thought was more important.