Jordan Peterson on The Nature of Truth - Joe Rogan

[@cwave047plays]

Joe Rogan goes, "Hello, freak bitches!" followed by Jordan Peterson saying "Who the hell doesn't wanna hear that?" LMAO

[@bengarbutt4700]

Brilliant 😂😂😂

[@absolutebedlam]

So good

[@japjotsingh3266]

hahaa

[@nareshdewasi4098]

😂😂

[@lapidus9552]

These are the conversations I've always wanted to have with my friends if we were smarter.

[@ssn22]

well we all wanted but try to have same conv. with a leftist !!

[@J0MBi]

It's the conversation you think you have when you smoked a lot of weed but really it was just "....like there's there's like metaphorical truth and it's genetically passed on and uh... what was I saying?"

[@rpgober3048]

Have you tried talking to them on DMT?

[@eliramirez3798]

Go get some new friends

[@megja1812]

Lol Yup 👍 I find majority of people don’t like having these convos. Boring ass folk.

[@josephmassaro]

This is how conversations should happen. People may disagree on things, but respect and civil discussion leads to a better understanding of differing points of view.

[@LH-nd9qg]

Joseph Massaro ((applause)) my thought exactly.

[@SlugDropsonheads]

Joseph Massaro Well that depends on the 'arena'; it is easy to remain calm during a debate that is this ambiguous and meta... The issues that plague our nation, and the discussions that are needed aren't as easily detached from one's own image/ place in society. The only one (emotionally) invested in this conversation is Mr. Peterson, but he thinks society is at the brink of collapse...

[@SlugDropsonheads]

In other words, no one's character is being called into question.

[@josephmassaro]

SlugDropsonheads+ Emotion is a good motivator, but a poor way to debate. It's what devolves disagreements into vitriolic mudslinging and ideological chasms. Also, does one's character need to be called into question? The argument is the thing, not the one making it.

[@missionpupa]

Emotionally invested? whats wrong with being invested? That makes us human, would you prefer someone who made claims but dont really care about what theyre saying? If you are wondering his disposition, he developed that tone from dealing with ignorant SJW's. If you can get past that and actually listen to what hes saying, then you will easily realize he is speaking for sincere concern using sound reasoning.

[@WeirdViking]

I love hearing JP say his intellect is at a limit in these issues, when I struggle to understand even 10%. And I'm a highly educated man myself. Just the scale and perspective of things. When people with an iq of 160+ and a life time devoted to thinking, reach a limit to solve the more complex issues in society.... It's somewhat humbling.

[@santiagoarroyob]

Jordan has a 160+ iq? Wtf

[@Dman9fp]

Everybody has a limit, especially around dangerous topics where a decieving headline about him saying something could easily come out. But he recognizes there has to be helpful lessons in mythology if it has persisted for so long, helped and shaped a very successful modern society and many even in the modern age of science and tech still believe in it. Of course America as a nation has Protestant Puritan roots so maybe it shouldn't be surprising it's still around, but Peterson realizes it still may have some use and lessons for society, even if it isn't a scientific peer reviewed work by any means

[@tjdugan5077]

level 3 neural network I looked it up once and saw a video where he said 150s

[@MrYutbe57]

160 is radically high but not so unbelievably uncommon as people probably think. Mine is 140's typically but IQ doesn't scale linearly. It functions more like the decibels scale. That podcast was intellectual Shakespearean poetry to someone who can (relative to Jordan and Bret) can barely form a proper couplet.

[@shanks6190]

@@MrYutbe57 where can you even find out your IQ, people tell me to avoid those 10 minute online quizzes so is the only option to pay for a test at a proper facility?

[@andrej13666]

I love how grounded Joe Rogans oppinions are, he really adds a tether for us of a simpler mind to hold on to next to the likes of Peterson and Weinstein

[@angiesimms886]

Please please please have more Dr. Peterson in the future

@Pepe The Cat Silence vermin, your kind isn't fit to address me.

[@AXharoth]

oh look 2 years and hes still here xD

[@skimask5933]

@ Holy fuck you got rolled lol

@@skimask5933 I don't care about your delusions sleepy. You don't matter.

[@J0MBi]

My favourite thing about Joe Rogan is that he knows enough to keep his mouth shut and let his guests do the talking.

[@christianpaulmusica]

“The idea of truth is much older than the idea of objective truth. And the original notion of truth wasn’t objective truth. It was like, “The arrow flies straight and true” and it meant something like, “Reliably on it’s way to the appropriate destination”- something like that. And when Christ said, “I am the way, the truth and the light” the truth that he was talking about wasn’t an objective truth.”- Genius

[@alotan2acs]

Better now the muddy the waters with “truth” then. Say “this is the morally right destination” or something like that. Much clearer.

[@IvanGonzalez-kf4lp]

That begs the question. How do you know it’s reliably on its way to the proper destination. Well, it would have to be true first in order for that to be the case but the very definition you’ve presented pre supposes that truth instead of constituting it.

[@miiscrayolacat2]

Not new though. The concept of the truth as being transcendental predate jordan peterson. St Augustine wrote about it.

[@TheExcep_tion]

Religion is created by man Therefore irrelevant.

[@amc3964]

Truth is not objective. It’s truth. And yes hard to decipher by people who need to perceive things and do so differently.

[@nelsonaugustoballencorrea4753]

I'm learning English, and i understood 90% of what i heard, i'm super happy :)

[@guttachetter1087]

good job

[@dlentz989]

I am fluent in English and I understood about 50%. Go you!!

[@guitarsz]

I'm a nerd, I've been listening to this guy non-stop.

[@santiagoarroyob]

I'll like to see your social skills and bank account

[@nodical802]

@@santiagoarroyob seethe

[@kylemccormack1785]

21:20 - Joe Rogan proving he's actually pretty smart, with an interjection about ethics. The dude is actually super sharp.

[@PhilosophyLines]

Joe was so on point at 14 minutes in! Said just what I wanted to.

[@andraw47]

Joe proper glitched out

[@idoanmarciano301]

What do you mean so on point? He doesn't get it

[@Infamous41]

@@idoanmarciano301 he kept quiet

[@emtee40]

This is when you believe, pursue, and execute a passion. College and higher education is just a index or guide to that information, but you must receive, parse, interpret and transmit. A million more psychology grads that achieve a professorship over the next 100 years won't reach Peterson level. Be happy to live during his time, I am.

[@amc3964]

Agreed.

[@ljph_1995]

'Human beings needed to figure out how to act without dying before they could understand the nature of the world well enough to justify that' insane

[@danasansone9152]

whoa

[@santiagoarroyob]

Lying makes you survive and have a better life but is not true nor moral.

[@johnnyb7271]

networks how does it make you have a better life? It makes your life infinitely more complex because you have to maintain the lies and remember everything that you have said and lied about.. The truth buttresses that and makes reality simpler (most of the time) and thus better..

[@santiagoarroyob]

@@johnnyb7271 yes, you have to remember what you said, but you'd rather remember than facing bad consequences

[@johnnyb7271]

@@santiagoarroyob?? if you continuously lie you wont be able to remember.. not everyone is a james Moriarty type genius. Then your just delaying those bad consequences for a later date and probably with dire consequences.. stupidity still

[@davidzahry]

There was nowhere to go.... There was nothing to do! So together we descended to make our dreams come true!

[@guitarsz]

LOVE that you had JP on the pod. He's awesome. Thanks Joe!

[@hugoguest6746]

Imaging if Joe had invited Eddie bravo, what he could add to the conversation

[@missionpupa]

Pizza Gate and Moon Landings!

[@jasonmpd2946]

Flat earth and fake moon landing bullshit.

[@micksmith5123]

I would add a like but want to keep it at 69

[@trollwayy5981]

Mick Smith... i just don’t give a fuck

[@Ale-do3rn]

Imagine if he invited Johnny Bravo... that would be pretty interesting...

[@frooshante]

11:04 "You shall love God more than anything," includes the implication of "Don't enrich uranium because that is a dangerous act of loving 'power' more than God." come on, guys, flex that grey matter. disclaimer: i don't know what "God" means.

[@PetersonEnthusiast]

it’s a good point and that’s often why people who have the most power (blackrock, bill gates) are living in accordance with the antichrist

[@rotbake5448]

Truth is a being. His path narrow. Ones head is lies. The heart just right. A dead heart far too wide.

[@Ebwr1973]

False information may be “useful”, but you don’t get to say it’s true, you get to say it’s useful.

[@Archangel76]

Underrated comment.

[@TheJourneyyy]

Peterson, a living a legend.

[@boswerinalucard]

Seeing JBP riled up is more action packed than most big budget hollywood action movies.

[@PetersonEnthusiast]

😂

[@liamhoyland3232]

the truth is so extremely frightening that no-one would sleep again. you hit the enrichment button God help us to be brave and tidy up as a group

[@ctrguy]

This is an incredibly beautiful explanation of why religion is so important, and why society & individuals are so massively blessed by it!! People get far too caught up on the capital “T” Truth instead of understanding the depth of wisdom contained within scripture and prophetic wisdom, that Jordan P breaks down with an unbiased depth that is unrivaled!!

[@willspeed6804]

The problem with religion is that people hide behind it instead of actually taking personal responsibility of trying to be a better person everyday and consider their actions in a way that helps/benefits others.

[@patrickbinter3715]

People assume because Peterson is defending religion he should automatically be discredited. Realize that these traditions have resurrected an entire civilization to literal global dominance. I would slow down and listen to his ideas critically before passing judgement.

[@jasoncoachtate]

Imagine being Joe Rogan and just watching this conversation happen in front of you. 🤯 Thats the longest time ive ever known him not to speak.

[@BadMedizin]

I would Think "Thou Shall Not Murder" covers the enriching uranium thingy.

[@dattrax7]

This is the most mind blowing discussion!! These guys are putting words, names and ideas of dozens of things that have bothered me throughout my 47yrs. I was fuzzy and not understanding the consequences of my decisions. My decisions were based on my confused and underdeveloped ideas I held to be true.

[@dlentz989]

If I were to hang out with Jordan and Bret socially, after 5 minutes I would be drooling on the table.

[@ChristianStout]

I dont understand Weinstein's comment about "thou shall not enrich Uranium" when the Bible already says "thou shall not kill", which already covers creating weapons, and enriched Uranium is the cheapest and cleanest method of power generation we have.

[@michaelcary2134]

Wtf go read your book

[@JS-bk4pn]

Jordan Peterson is a perfect example of religious truth or metaphorical truth. He may not present the "scientific truth" that Sam Harris does but he's helped way many more people that Sam has. So what's more "true'"? I'll go with Jordan Peterson because his advice is practical and can improve your life so much more effectively and efficiently. Sam Harris can definitely state facts but are they helpful? Not to me so much anyways.

[@PetersonEnthusiast]

mhm, true.

[@tonyhawk35]

the language spoken is godly

[@abcabcdoes9533]

This was SO.... Fcking.... Deep. Im pretty sure my IQ raised slightly just from listening.

[@QazwerDave]

Love a channel (show) that allows this argument to go on like this !!

[@cymbalspecialist]

Awesome. We need a revisit on this conversation now please. (2021)

[@klausmuhlhoff2707]

Totally enjoyable , Thank You Joe .

[@wongke]

This is the best one yet.

[@getchasome6230]

Still is a year later too

[@MnemoHistory]

“The arrow is reliably on its way to the target” is a way of referring to the correspondence of a statement to its intended referents.

[@iamnotafraidiwasborntodoth5688]

What Peterson is saying is the same thing as the difference between The Old Testament and The New Testament ... The Old Testament is Truth, the New Testament is also Truth - they are the same Truth. Truth actually fits into all time period and all circumstance .. this is why a book containing Truth, even thought the world is foreign can be transferred into a current world. Truth is an absolute.

[@toothlessguy2544]

what a high quality talk jeez

[@missionpupa]

Didn't anyone else notice how Peterson just broke down the formalization of Ethics impromptu? Brilliant.

[@eliramirez3798]

He says that things do not happen for a reason but his own explanation proves everything happens for a reason

[@ray32g]

Joe needs some 4k cameras

[@Ck-jy8bw]

No need to see his forehead in that much detail probably blind us all from the reflection of it

[@OGStinkywizzleteats]

The nice thing about our emotions is that they don't evolve with time. Jealousy was the same in a person 2000 years ago as it is in us today. Same with joy, anger etc. So to say that ancient wisdom becomes irrelevant over time isn't taking this into account.

[@connorstefanski9088]

Yeah I sort of think Bret missed the point (I said this in another comment). The archetypes shown by Jung are general enough that they can be applied across time even as circumstances change. The archetype or the christ like figure that Jordan mentions that stands up to the tyranny of the state is general enough that it can be applied across time even as the nature of the states tyranny changes over time. Because it is so general it can apply to standing up to a state that allows the enriching of uranium in the present just as easily as it applies to standing up to the Roman persecution of Christians 2000 years ago. I think that’s the main point, the fact that the archetypes in ancient religion are so general is exactly why they stay relevant. Their application may be updated, but values they present need not be. There’s no reason to codify enriching uranium in the Ten Commandments, application of the main point will cause the problem to take care of itself

[@christiancrane5072]

This might be one of the greatest conversation of truth and religious truth

[@sswy1984]

Bret's porcupine example have an pre-assumed utility/goal function, which is "to survive, to be safe". but not everyone share the same goal/value/utility. it is always better for people to know "the truth that porcupine cannot throw quills", based on this truth, people can make decisions for themselves. for those who share the same utility that "to survive, to be safe", they will probably stay far away anyway. for those who want to take some risk or want some excitement, they will move closer. anyway, to know the truth is always better for decision making.

[@msmurk2011]

Why isnt the comment section available on JRE anymore??

[@getchasome6230]

Indubitably

[@bulgarianmineshaft1913]

I'm writing an essay about truth, I don't know if this was more helpful or more confusing!

[@anneroos9463]

Hahah same!

[@HexoNerd]

beautifully had conversation.

[@noahgreene7246]

Just 3 men trying g to understand themselves and the world better. Its honestly beautiful

[@Matt-mz6uh]

Sometimes I wish Jordon Peterson would chill with the metaphors and up the concision

[@Magepure6749]

Man, I'd say as far as the whole point of this talk was - metaphors are indispensable. Their simplest forms are euphemisms and exaggerations, the most complex the archetypal stories. Some people foolishly split reality into truth and falsehood - like those idiots who fact-check jokes XD - this is a very arrogant approach, because it assumes that we have the capability to know everything about everything around us with 100% certainty, which is simply not true due to a number of factors, sensory limitations of our mortal bodies being just one of many. We benefit greatly from having the mental skill of approximation, and it is where metaphors come to action - they are the working-tool-truths. They allow us to talk about things we'd otherwise not discuss just because we don't know everything about them or because of a taboo. The ability to understand and talk in metaphors is crucial for advancement of human knowledge, and so is the ability to approximate - both of these skills the fanatical post-modernist anti-theists want to throw away, just because of the fact that it's mostly religious packages that those abilities came it.

[@Shotzeethegamer]

Keep this in mind when listening to Weinstein: Luke 5:33-39 33 And they said unto him, `Wherefore do the disciples of John fast often, and make supplications -- in like manner also those of the Pharisees -- but thine do eat and drink?' 34 And he said unto them, `Are ye able to make the sons of the bride-chamber -- in the bridegroom being with them -- to fast? 35 but days will come, and, when the bridegroom may be taken away from them, then they shall fast in those days.' 36 And he spake also a simile unto them -- `No one a patch of new clothing doth put on old clothing, and if otherwise, the new also doth make a rent, and with the old the patch doth not agree, that [is] from the new. 37 `And no one doth put new wine into old skins, and if otherwise, the new wine will burst the skins, and itself will be poured out, and the skins will be destroyed; 38 but new wine into new skins is to be put, and both are preserved together; 39 and no one having drunk old [wine], doth immediately wish new, for he saith, The old is better.'

[@japjotsingh3266]

The title should also include Bret's name. His input was profound

[@_Noopy_]

I have always liked Joe's openness of mind. But today, I loved his Joe's summary at 13.05, it was was good defeat of Jordan's and other guy's 'truth' ideas.

[@_Noopy_]

The main point from Joe was that facts and wisdom are different things. And Jordan and other guy love to conflate them together into their weird definition of "truth". This whole debate is just semantic. These days when we use the word truth for an idea, we mean the factual/ empirical value of the contents of that idea. Not the utilitarian value or the wisdom of the idea. Maybe in older days it was different. But now the connotation of truth = factual. Joe says: Truth is the factual content of an idea. Utilitarian value of the idea is wisdom, not truth. "Porcupines do not throw quills" is a fact and hence truth. And if someone is told that "Porcupines throw quills", it is wrong and untrue, even though there is usefulness and wisdom in that non-factual idea. Peterson says: "Porcupines do NOT throw quills" is truth. And "Porcupines throw quills" is also a type of truth, because it has value to it and it has usefulness to it just like the former statement. Other guy says: The same thing as peterson, he just differentiate the two statements as 'factual truth' (former) vs, 'metaphorical truth' (latter). I am with Joe, i.e. just let the truth be truth guys. The factual truth. Give other words to other things you want to imply. Ultimately Peterson wants to say that bibilical myths have "truth" to them, that is a dangerous and liberal use of the word truth in its modern connotation and context. He can just say, bibilical myths have ideas which tell very interesting insights about how humans think..etc etc. But Dont hijack the word 'truth'.

[@_Noopy_]

continuing on the older thread...

[@tsaoh5572]

This is not about facts and wisdom. This is not about semantics. I understand the confusion though, as they do not explain themselves very well. This is a discussion about what we are allowed to call 'true', and not on a semantic level. The issue is that even the things we held to be very very simple 'just let the truth be the truth' things have now been rebutted; quantum physics completely threw 'objective truths' in physics upside down. We have to understand that, in the time that we are in now, we hold some things to be 'true' when this will likely be altered or completely changed as our technological capabilities to investigate improve. There is an objective truth out there, but we are just human beings, all we can do is approach this truth. These approximations are the metaphorical truth; they are 'true' for now because this works the best for us now to understand, explain, and interact with our environment. These pre-quantum physics physical laws were regarded 50 years ago as 'true' as people regarded the bible 400 years ago. This is the thing about metaphorical truths. This is why we have to study them and allow space for them in our universities, why religion is so important. These are our 'old' truths that now do not work anymore, that are debunked. We should study them because it teaches us how to move forward, what not to do, and also why in certain truths are more important than others since they seem to survive more in history. We should also be careful about completely disregarding them, since they were indeed the best approximate of an objective truth we had at a a set time. However, as Peterson explains, even though in the past this multi-dimensional (or multi-layered, whatever you prefer) definition of the word truth was understood, we now only adhere to the idea that 'truth is truth', it is an objective thing. This is simply not the case, logically speaking. Also historically speaking even. This is the point they are debating. I am personally not sure whether I agree with this, but yeah this is what I got out of it. Quite brain-cracking.

[@Danskadreng]

TSAOH!: Hey, so to break this down VERY simple, would be to say that back in the days where Jesus was around preaching, the "truth" was considered to be that he was the son of God, the earth was flat, and so on. As time went by, we got to debunk those "truths", while some would probably call it theories since no evidence was actually made/shown back then, but generally, they were believed to be the truth. ??? -Thank you in advance.

[@daseinbellen]

Joe is the smartest guy in the room

[@karlkohlhase]

"The scribes of the Kingdom will bring forth from their treasures both things old and new." --Jesus

[@santiagoarroyob]

Except slavery, massacre, scapegoating, ethnical wars, tribalism and immorality

[@itkojecockot]

lets face it...... Joe even being in the room is pointless during these two debating :D:D

[@digitalsailor1785]

Now this Mister has thaught me that the abstraction of the Scripture isn't just foolish mistake but a way of making those stories applicable to the future. And that's absolutely genius.

[@kirathekillernote2173]

Retroactive justification of poorly written books I call it

[@Unseen.Warfare]

@@kirathekillernote2173 Every book after The Bible has been influenced by the Bible. The Bible is the origin of the language you are using and the roots of all western books and language.

[@Zakill]

11:09 1. Though Shalt Not Kill 14:41

[@ray32g]

One of the best shows. Joe needs to have Kent Hovind on the podcast

[@l0gaRythm]

It's not only about something being true, it's also about the propagation of truth in human context. A metaphorical truth is necessarily memeable, as such it is more effective and more widespread than just telling straight facts

[@IvanGonzalez-kf4lp]

But doesn’t actually tell you anything about it’s underlying validity of being trueb

[@thomaspowell2043]

He said Pinnochio was a liar. He wasn't a liar. He was a child who lied, being taught not to lie. That's not the same as being a liar. Everyone has lied, especially when they're young.

[@declancronin437]

"When you seek truth, you seek God whether you know it or not." ~ St Edith Stein

[@waltanthony1988]

8:50 but people DO THINK ITS LITERAL. you can define it as "not literal" all day long but people are still going to believe that the virgin birth actually happened, and that noahs arc is real, etc etc ..... and that has loads of negative consequences. in the modern era, the argument in favor of religion has been soundly defeated.

[@Unseen.Warfare]

Noah’s ark is real and was found on the top of mount Ararat as the Bible said.

[@waltanthony1988]

@@Unseen.Warfare No it hasn't. All claims of recovered Ark remains have been thoroughly debunked. it never will be found either...because it was not real.

[@Unseen.Warfare]

@@waltanthony1988 Buddy, you don’t think Noah built the Ark? He left the measurements and people have reproduced it today. Jonah and the whale isn’t outside the realm of possibility. It’s likely the story of Adam and Eve is a reference to early humans taking psychedelic mushrooms 🍄 hence why you have these very symbolic images of after eating the fruit they gain this knowledge of self. The priest in the holy of hollies would fill the temple with smoke made from logs and coals made of the acacia tree which contains DMT and mixed it with inhibiters. It was the law for him to wait until the entire temple was filled as the ark with the tablets sat. He slowly backed out of the temple and proceeded to have visions. None of this is hocus pocus. All principles firmly based in reality. Just because you can’t explain these phenomenon doesn’t mean they aren’t true. You don’t know what will be found. The Dead Sea scrolls were found by a Shepard searching for his one lost sheep when he stumbled across a cave and threw a rock and heard the rock hit pottery. The rest is history. You are viewing the biblical stories from a modern perspective, so when something can’t be explained in a objectively true way it’s deemed useless which is not only ignorant... it’s a shame. Considering how much influence The Bible has had on the very language we are using to communicate. It being the blueprint of all modern books. It was the first most widely distributed book in human history. It’s influence on language and spirituality is so interwoven into art and literature and culture. The New Testament completely sent shock waves throughout history. Even the critics owe careers to it. The Old Testament is so deeply ingrained into our psychological development is holds the secrets to the roots of mans psyche. Consciousness can’t be measured. Science doesn’t have an explanation for consciousness and knows little to nothing. It’s a thorn In the side for people like you. Consciousness was very deeply understood by the ancient mystics. The entire ideology of The Old and New Testament revolutionized the way people interacted and viewed the world around them. It’s a written river of human knowledge and every word has deeply thought about anecdotes from people throughout the ages trying to understand this sacred document. Your bitterness towards a Book shows that your ego has consumed your means of reason. If you can’t see that the Story of Christ has resonated with people for so many years since his death because he reflects the hypocrisy of us all. Everyone of us is represented in the gospel. The moment he flipped the tables of the money changers they were going to kill him. You know why? Jesus caused the rulings of power to see what they truly were. Evil, greedy, power hungry, immoral, full of hatred and envy. His existence was unacceptable by the existing hierarchy because if he kept preforming miracles the position of the Pharisees in power would completely be overthrown in the temple by a real man of God. Yeshua would fast for very long hours and we are told he helped everyone freely. Never accepting payment for his teaching or healings. Men like you would praise a shaman and claim Yeshua a fraud when the prophet Isaiah himself prophesied his coming. The same with the Magi who brought gifts to his birthplace. They seen it in the constellation Pisces ♓️ represented as a fish as the messiah is represented as a fish and would appear in Bethlehem. Carl Jung the greatest psychological mind of all time wrote a book called Aion: Researches into the Phenomenology of the Self In this book he breaks down Good and evil as a fact of reality that has manifested from our inner reality into our outer reality. Concluded by the synchronization with significant events in history and how those events in history correlate to the stars and the collective unconscious including manifestations of prophecy into reality birthed from the unconscious mind If one doesn’t recognize the self and the inner most psychic processes it symbolizes as autonomous one might mistaken those processes as the rational will. In that case the ego becomes inflated Even though Jung admits his concept of self is incompatible with science It seems none the less to be describing a psychological Truth. A psychological Truth that can’t be measured by science. It is an Abstract representation of ones psychological processes We must read the Bible or we shall not understand psychology. Our psychology, whole lives, our language and imagery are built upon the Bible. ~Carl Jung

[@Unseen.Warfare]

The only thing defeated is you. You’ve descended so far into the Abyss of the material you’ve completely disregarded a piece of yourself and human culture and have dismissed as useless because you project your own shadow onto the Christian Faith. Christ didn’t come to preach religion. He came to preach The way, The truth and the life Manifesting our nightmares into reality. Projecting them much like sleep paralysis. The crisp dreams of REM spill over into waking consciousness. As the Antichrist spirit itself becomes a psychological process. The pendulum swings back. A psychological law. Satan as The Psychological shadow of Christ. He prophesied The age of the Antichrist. It’s here, we are in the Anti-Christian period. Known as Aries ♈️. 10And he said unto them, Behold, when ye are entered into the city, there shall a man meet you, bearing a pitcher of water; follow him into the house where he entereth in Certain times of the year we are told near Passover the energy of the stars allows the power of manifestation to be at its highest. This book on Abramelin the mage speaks in-depth about this.

[@Unseen.Warfare]

@@waltanthony1988 also no Christian belief is jeopardized by any viable variant. If we held the same standard of truth you nonbelievers propose about The New Testament as a historical document towards any other document around the same time period we would still be in the dark ages.

[@don_specialfx2632]

Beneath all the shade of questions and interviews, behind all the good intentions and motivations posed by these questions... these ppl constantly put peterson to the test, watching, looking, poking, waiting for him to slide. Setting traps left right and centre and swinging at him tacitly with mighty blows of opposition and sometimes contrariety. Like Samson against a 1000 soldiers he remains. It is beyond me the depth of wisdom this man has by quite frankly speaking what is truth. Clear, concise... unwavering and founded. Anchored upon every piece of detail you can gander across human knowledge. "for I will provide you eloquence and wisdom which none of your adversaries will be able to oppose or refute."

[@canttReid]

The most mind blowing podcast I’ve ever heard.

[@zachh127zh]

This feels like Truth vs. fact

[@Abbdullaziz]

Jordan Peterson is so convincing.

[@SpicyGherkin69]

The most thought provoking arguments have the least amount of arguing and name calling, what a surprise

[@SenapatiM96]

Good ol' JRE.

[@thegreenwave6741]

What it comes down to is that truth is subjective while fact is objective.

[@missionpupa]

You say that like, you solved the problem by simply aligning ourselves to fact than truth. When the real question is distinguishing the two, if there is in fact 2 of them to distinguish each other from.

[@thegreenwave6741]

reiwell del going by what peterson and weinstein are saying, truth is subjective to metaphor and perception, while fact is objectively observed and scientifically tested with the same results no matter how many times it's tested. An example would be if someone said a man murdered someone to protect his family. Maybe the murderer was insane and thought the victim was trying to hurt his family, so he murdered the man. To the insane man it was a "truth" that his victim was trying to hurt his family, but it is a fact that the insane man murdered his victim, regardless of whether he thinks it's a fact, the truth or not.

[@thegreenwave6741]

reiwell del and there is no alignment to one or the other. I'm discerning one from the other.

[@I_Ace]

Yeah truth seems to be subjective in some sense. So it seems from this interview is to live out your truth fully

[@tombadil64]

Wrong, that's what they were discussing the entire time. Did you even listen?

[@timtimtimmaah]

What Joe Rogan isn't getting about the Porcupine Metaphor is that all scientific knowledge was at one point, unknown, then known, and will probably be then dismissed by new information. So knowing false or incomplete information that is modifies our behaviour in a way that helps us survive is still useful and also not "wrong" or "lied to" at the time.

[@logdog6762]

'Thou Shalt Not Enrich Uranium'. I think he's talking about weapons. It's important to know that enrichment up to 5% is necessary for the majority of nuclear fuel. Weapons require 90%+. Enriching Uranium is not inherently bad.

[@jasonmpd2946]

Log Dog You missed the point. He was being hyperbolic, too.

[@cladelpino]

Also.. isnt there a thou shall not kill to cover that ?

[@willcortez78]

Claudio Delpino its thou shalt not murder

[@tesr684]

thanks!, still covers nuclear warfare

[@paulyj]

The hazard of enriching it was obvious. Its covered with though shall not kill....

[@serdoubleyou6239]

Truth can simply be defined as love. This can help understanding all living things. The animal kingdom follows their truth, human beings follow their truth often by using the tool of language. Language as a tool is a double edged sword, therefore human truth can be divorced of our instincts to seek love in a healthy minded way. This explains the mental health crisis. Just my opinion.

[@MrTylergallenbeck]

I think what's actually being talked about here is not the difference between fact and truth, but truth and faith.

[@TheSilverOrn]

My god I wish we forced people to watch debates like this in highschool

[@globalunconscious]

Summary: traditions may have some value, and it is wise to examine each tradition and find out whether it objectively wise or not, when you have the capability to do so. Humanity's existence may depend on continuing to follow traditions we do not yet understand. It is in our best interest to find out the reasons behind tradition and not follow tradition assuming they remain useful today. Precision of language would clear things up. Listening would also help. If Jordan and Sam asked more little questions, like: what did you mean by truth? That would save 15 minutes of trying to get the same point across in 10 different metaphors. Each person (these three plus Sam) are intelligent enough to know how to logically argue a point. It takes an extra bit to empathize, and imagine you are the other person, to see where the misunderstandings might be. Misunderstanding isn't a lack of intelligence on the listeners part with these folks, it is a lack of adequate communication to their intended audience.

[@AlienAV]

you can't really clarify every word your interlocutor says. there are (generally) set definitions for specific terms, and I think a side that tries to replace those definitions with different ones should be clear about it and communicate it honestly. in a situation where both sides genuinely think that their respective definition is the common and honest one, the way to resolve it is actually to try to get your point across in different metaphors, so as to describe your view in other, less contested terms.

[@antonioroselli7074]

Highly Disagree. Just because Filth ment shit, and people had a reason to not shit in camps because of Gods will. It does not mean that the underlying cause wasn't there. This is exactly what Sam was explaining about pragmatism. A truth exists whether or not you know it yet. Labeling it as something different does not make it "true" whether or not the consequences are good or bad.

[@spencerowens2261]

Truth is concrete and works on various levels. It is also seems plural. Many of these examples are examples of people compensating with limited truth. Everyone operates in these fallible ways because our brains are limited processors. Obviously a person who possesses more truth is better off, but sometimes we have to operate short of that because we have to deal with a complex life with limited biological resources. The porcupine and malaria examples are great for showing how a brain can compensate by using simplified thought patterns.

[@law-two7327]

But the controversial distinction that they make is between "fact" (which seems to be the truth you speak of) and "wisdom" (which may not be "true" in the sense that you're using it). In those two examples, someone without more truth (but more "wisdom"). May in fact be better off...

[@TheRuVedicChannel]

Mind Blown!!

[@nickmagrick7702]

sad only 70k ppl have seen this. All that information out there that seems fundamentally important. Can't know/hear them all.

[@Ck-jy8bw]

Still only 93k if more people listened to this stuff the world might go places

[@maxmasselus8168]

"Hello freak bitches" "Who the hell doesnt wanna hear that???" 0:00

[@Ronventi6750]

Jesus, Peterson is on another level

[@thejackanapes5866]

"True enough..." "Metaphorical truth" While "truth" is a mapping function between a set of linguistic propositions and some value assignment, and a 'metaphorical truth" can obtain given the stated _a priori_ - there can be only one truth that is literally real - and there's a major problem with dabbling in metaphorical truth _as if_ it actually obtained. Fitness adaptation vs. accuracy adaptation, and the latter being our best bet at *pehaps* asymptotically understanding the nature of the objects of our perception. Example: "All guns are loaded." Metaphorically true. Sure. Literally not true, potentially. Probably. The actual meaning is "handle all guns as if they were loaded" - i.e. Jordan's "Live as if God exists." False positives like this are all fine and dandy... Until you need a loaded gun, and assume all guns are loaded... and happen to have one that isn't. TL;DR somehow, despite evolution being a heuristic mess of a process, we have an accuracy adaptation. It isn't perfect, it never will be. But not using it is the dumbest (and maybe the last) thing you might ever do.

[@santiagoarroyob]

We have to be precise, this is one of the greatest concepts we can get.

[@I_Ace]

Well I understand that saying that act like a gun is loaded but that is in the context so people wont accidentally shoot themselves or others. If u want to check if the gun is loaded, take out the clip and check, that is why empiricism is important

[@Allen1029]

Air guitar. Love this.

[@samuelshaulov4623]

If you prepare for the porcupine with the throwing quills, you are prepared for the porcupine without them too. If you prepare for the snake as if it is a dragon you can handle both, but the inverse fails, assuming that the dragon has all the abilities of a snake, including its speed, and a great, fiery breath and tail and all.

[@SomnaCasadoBroder]

Moment 22:30 (or something like that) Maping facts into actions: "Let's say you're standing in front of a field, and you looking at the field. The field does not tell you how to walk through it. There's a million ways through the field. And no matter how many facts about the field you aggregate you not going to be able to determine your apropriate path by aggregaring those facts." WRONG. If you map the facts then you DO know how to act. But you have to consider one fact (a difficult one) that is not about the field. That is: what do you want. If you know the world (material world + inter-subjective world) and what do you want (inner-subjetive world) then you could (emphasis on could) know what to do. (PS: it's very difficult to know all these facts, although)

[@ITSME-nd4xy]

Our "knowing what we want" is not so simple. What we want consciously (i.e., through "free will") is actually weak, and mostly subsumed by our biological needs. In every instance, we first want to survive, and then have stability. Only when our biological needs are met, do our conscious ("free will") wants come to play. This is the 3rd & beyond "wants", in my example below. We also must understand that if we are stuck to the ground, we cannot find the optimal way to traverse (unless we had a "birds eye view" of the entire field, with falcon-like vision). So given that we're stuck to the ground, and can only see a part of the field around us, this limits us. Given such limitations, we can still proceed and probably find ONE (of many) safe path through that field. That's really all that we want, to get through. We don't necessarily want to take the optimal path. Before walking through that field, we First want to survive (to make it to the other side of the field unharmed, without being eaten by a hidden tiger or bit by a hidden snake). Secondly we want to avoid all "problems" (we want stability in our existence, and remain at the level of entropy we are in) - ex, we don't want a sprained ankle from stepping onto a rock, don't want to slip in a muddy puddle in the field, don't want to get bitten by a bee, etc. At a third level, we may want to find food or water within the field (because we're hungry or thirsty). To accomplish these collective Wants, we cannot know in advance (at the entrance-edge of the field) everything we need in order to avoid death and problems. While/before every step we take to traverse the field, we need to constantly update our "mapping of facts", and be vigilant (so we don't miss any threat or opportunity). To know whether this approach will get us through ANY field, look at how today we train autonomous robots to traverse complex terrain such as forests and fields... we train them exactly in this way... look, assess, move, look, assess, move.... This also applies just as well to "metaphorical fields" (of ideas, situations, social conflicts, behaviors, etc.) that we want to traverse.

[@Foolian1332]

"Interpretating" 27:40 and then a good interjectation

[@mohamedabusalih7824]

هداكم الله جميعاً إلى الحق المبين، حتى لايكثر تلعثمكم🌹

[@MultiShiznit]

We only think 1+1=2. Numbers are infinite both positive and negative, so 1 could be divided infinite times. We understand nothing.

[@santiagoarroyob]

I'd argue that the point doesn't exist in nature. It's just like a perfect circle, it doesn't exist

[@Jcoch_27]

I very much disagree with Weinstein's view on religion. But I love how he carefully words and explains his points. I respect him and I hope one day that he shall see that there is such thing a literal religious truth.

[@jimmysmith736]

Yes I agree. I believe atheist have a belief that man should worship himself, which I have huge problem with. A self importance which leads to selfish and hedonistic desires. I believe they deny the truth of religion which is nature imo. I’m not even smart so forgive me if I come across ignorant.

[@kevvymetal666]

at 26:20 its like jordan just played the most intricate piano composition , hands the spotlight over to Bret who then fumbles out chopsticks.

[@hope757]

This is a CONSERVATIVE conversation about religion and societal wisdom on truth that almost, ALMOST gets to why people on the left believe in internalized and systematic racism. Maybe the wisdom and ethics that we operate with now, partially built during a time when we openly had slaves while declaring ourselves free of tyrannical oppression, worked well for the US at a certain point, but people are realizing only in recent decades that it is bonkers to have a system that dissuades a third of the American population from trying to self-actualize because they're lazy or thugs or whatever Fox News would tell you. You may not believe racism is still a problem in America, but I can tell you people on the Left think it is and the thought-pattern is strikingly similar to this discussion. Like we all know the factual truth that white and black people are equal (or are supposed to), but that is not equivalent to people accepting the idea as prevailing wisdom. In other words, a metaphorical truth but a literal falsehood. "Yeah, racism is over... so lazy n-words need to shut up about it." This is seriously thought-provoking shit.

[@thebattler5478]

The truth hurts - that's why people can't handle it.

[@inurendoes]

Jordan "the Newtonians and moral relativists are dangerous - I'm a Darwinian and truth is relative" Peterson

[@santiagoarroyob]

You need more likes

[@williamrunner6718]

Truth is defined as that which corresponds with reality. Well, that my friend resolves to opinion because it is dependent on an observer. It is dependent on proof which is utilized by the subjective and limited sensory system. Now, I'm sure that someone would use the circular argument and begging the question by asking me if what I just said is the truth. Well, you can't analyze truth with truth. This word is defined just like all concepts, it's not some magical word that was dropped from heaven. It was invented by man. The word can't be defined without invoking an observer. In other words it is nothing but opinion. Jordan Peterson's truth is different than Sam Harris' truth. It is subjective to the person.

[@santiagoarroyob]

You can use reason to justify reason because it isn't contradictory nor circular. You can justify truth with truth. What's your opinion on gravity? If it hasn't been refuted once it can't be said to be an opinion. And this "how can we know anything" is ridiculous, I don't know what argument is unquestionable but saying gravity is opinion is retarded and contradictory to everything we know. It's agreed by everyone at worst and a unquestionable fact at best. What is a subjective opinion to you?

[@Dman9fp]

Exactly, words are cheap and only meant to convey simple stuff, not the intricacies of truth. What may be true for one individual or system may not be for another, or time period. Morality varies widely across time and cultures, but when there is common ground across all individuals in a single setting, it appears true because it works and there is no reason to think otherwise. Our brains look for patterns and things to work in the most simplistic yet practical ways possible, not for how they actually are. As Dawkins said, even a few hundred years ago you'd be deemed insane if you stated nothing truly touches each other (electrons repel each other) and we are composed of cells that are mostly empty space. The knowledge serves no practical function, but it's the truth nonetheless. My gut feeling is there's many hidden truths that are either too dark or irrelevant to be exposed or sought out, but truths indeed exist whether discovered or praised or not (although it's clear morality is largely driven by disgust as much or more than justice, especially since most people are largely emotional beings and emotions definitely cause biases in everyone's logic systems)

[@imperfectious]

I don't know what you just said, but you special.

[@SymphonyLifeNow]

The nature of truth comes from within everything and is manifest by the inner heart condition that is receptive to the universal never ending heart beat of unconditional truth. To feel in awe and reverence for a higher power and intelligence, far superior to little humanity.

[@thomaso1328]

Lets get some subtitles for Joe so he can join in the conversation.

[@julbarrier]

this is like watching two great stags fighting