Navigating Belief, Skepticism, and the Afterlife | Alex O'Connor

Dr. Jordan B. Peterson sits down in-person with philosophical-oriented KZbinr and podcaster Alex O’Connor. They discuss the proper use of skepticism, the true meaning of belief and prayer, the mythological and historical nature of the Bible, the level-of-analysis problem, and the potential for the use of AI to examine epistemology.
Alex O'Connor is a philosophy-oriented KZbinr, podcaster, and public speaker with over 750,000 subscribers on KZbin. He graduated in 2021 from St. John's College, Oxford University, with a BA in philosophy and theology. In 2023, he launched the “Within Reason” podcast, which has featured guests including Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Slavoj Žižek, Neil deGrasse Tyson, and Rory Stewart, amongst others. He has debated issues of religion, ethics, and politics with figures including Ben Shapiro, Michael Knowles, Douglas Murray, and Piers Morgan.
This episode was recorded on May 17th, 2024
Dr. Peterson's extensive catalog is available now on DailyWire+: bit.ly/3KrWbS8
ALL LINKS: linktr.ee/drjordanbpeterson
- Sponsors -
ExpressVPN: Get 3 Months FREE of ExpressVPN: expressvpn.com/jordan
PreBorn!: Help save 11,000 babies from abortion: preborn.com/Jordan
Hallow: Get 3 months free at hallow.com/Jordan
- Links -
2024 tour details can be found here jordanbpeterson.com/events
Peterson Academy petersonacademy.com/
For Alex O’Connor:
On X CosmicSkeptic?ref...
On Facebook / cosmicskeptic
On Instagram / cosmicskeptic
On KZbin / @cosmicskeptic
- Chapters -
(0:00) Coming up
(0:46) Intro
(2:47) Skepticism should be in the service of something
(5:35) Intellectual victory versus fruitful conversation
(9:31) Clarifying the term “belief” in it’s religious and mundane context
(13:54) God as an orientation toward the highest value and the regress issue
(15:50) Understanding God conceptually; is he “real” in the material sense as an agential being?
(18:50) The evolution of the physicality of God; Eliade on Nietzsche’s “death of God”
(20:20) “Profound religious account is bottomless;” the mythological and historical Jesus
(28:43) Where Dawkins and Peterson might just agree
(31:40) Can falsehoods help you survive?
(35:20) The impossibility of reducing the Biblical corpus to a reassuring banality
(45:25) God as the ultimate fictional character and how fiction and fact intertwine
(49:01) Possession, perception, and the level-of-analysis problem
(55:34) Elvis Presley’s guitar; hierarchical context is separate from the apprehension of the object
(58:18) The inverse correlation between the specificity of an answer and the importance of the question
(1:02:14) The physicality of the resurrection; the canonical versus the Gnostic tradition
(1:05:55) The Testimony of Truth; was Christ the serpent in the Garden?
(1:14:20) Computational epistemology: a new field of religious study?
(1:22:43) Can ideology be good? Proper interpretation and the cosmic order
(1:29:00) Jesus and the Quran; the pathology of mythologization
(1:35:24) “If your aim is upward then God is with you;” vicarious redemption and bearing your cross
(1:38:17) Dr. Peterson on Hell and the afterlife
(1:48:15) What really forms the basis of Christian thinking and the responsibility it demands
// COURSES //
Discovering Personality: jordanbpeterson.com/personality
Self Authoring Suite: selfauthoring.com
Understand Myself (personality test): understandmyself.com
// BOOKS //
Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life: jordanbpeterson.com/Beyond-Order
12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos: jordanbpeterson.com/12-rules-...
Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief: jordanbpeterson.com/maps-of-m...
#JordanPeterson #JordanBPeterson #DrJordanPeterson #DrJordanBPeterson #DailyWirePlus

[@CosmicSkeptic]

Thanks for this, Dr. Peterson. A thoroughly animating conversation!

[@JBHawkz]

Hi mate

[@moneymayhem2000]

@CosmicSkeptic Any time BUDDY

[@TeachingNFun]

Nice jacket, mate

[@notjacknapier8498]

Why wouldn't it come to Sanatana yet, one day in the near future, not in the need i presume but in the awakening.

[@bookpaper105]

you have a history channel take on christianity.

[@AlexWalkerSmith]

Alex has an unmatched mastery of using emotion-free logic while still maintaining a human level of personability.

[@BunnyBUNGALO]

Perfectly said. He's an impressive individual, not often you come across someone that intelligent.

[@elmo4672]

Eloquently framed.

[@owensullivan252]

But he really doesn't. His commonly-stated slavery objection is a purely emotional argument, quote mining for the worst sounding passage about slavery while ignoring all the context about what that word means in the Bible. He plays at biting the bullet when it comes to morality, saying it's illusory, while being an "ethical vegan" as if that should means anything according to his worldview. He borrows meaning and morality from a theistic worldview to prop up a deterministic, materialistic atheism in which meaning and morality are, by his own admission, nonexistent. He needs a philosophy course.

[@RinZ3993]

He is the only one that can steer Peterson in a way that he starts making some sense

[@jimj9040]

@@owensullivan252Theistic worldviews didn’t invent meaning and morality. They borrowed everything they espoused from other ideas had simultaneously by everyone else alive on the planet that had thoughts in their heads. It would be a strange thing indeed if atheist and theist morality wasn’t mostly aligned because we all live together in societies. I think you are just a bitter person that doesn’t like when people don’t believe exactly what You believe and should probably take a course in humility.

[@sup9023]

This is my super-bowl.

[@melo5303]

For sure!

[@okay4403]

Haha yes!

[@egy8365]

Best comment 2024

[@etagged]

O'Connor is a BA in philosophy and theology and he has a podcast? So he's qualified to work at a Starbucks in LA?

[@JamesSmith-cm7sg]

😂

[@Cblazer100]

Alex was absolutely brilliant in asking direct and clarifying questions to Jordan’s beliefs. It’s something I’ve been begging people to do for years now. It helped me understand Jordan so much more and what he believes and doesn’t believe.

[@videobenny3]

This is the brilliance of having two intellectuals, with inquisitive intent, asking underlying fundamental building blocks of the other’s beliefs.

[@Shawn-nq7du]

I think most believe Alex was totally wrong by making that video last year that Jordan Peterson is an atheist. I think he understands him better too in that unlike an atheist, Jordan Peterson, not only uses the literal meaning of the word, but the spiritual senses as well in context.

[@EquippingBroadcast]

I will destroy the wisdom of the wise. ( 1 Cor.1:19;) A true baby in Christ has the awesome truth, Dr. Peterson is searching for...

[@pescatoralpursuit1726]

No he wasn't. The entire time his primary goal is a game of Gotcha, albeit a little more subtle and sophisticated. The reason this is apparent, is his consistent demand that Peterson answer according to his perspective.

[@gingerbread7778]

@@pescatoralpursuit1726Bro you are dickriding so hard rn

[@JohanJonasson]

"Sorry, I don't want to derail you from your tangent." That's hilarious. Great conversation you two.

[@lucacolodetti374]

Man, I am just grateful that I spent all these years learning English. What a privilege it is to be able hear and understand this conversation

[@aimhigh3701]

“…these years…”. THESE Ffs Luca I thought we discussed this in your last lesson.

[@bangboom5390]

Bruh... English is my first language and I only understand like 30% of these podcasts lol Congrats tho! It is a privilege to be able to listen to these and understand somewhat.

[@Jeroen4]

Oof. You might wanna take an IQ test, you might be eligible for benefits.

[@manuam98]

Same here, I'm glad I started watching movies in English when I was 8 and started reading English books while in college, gives me an advantage over my monolingual friends 😂

[@aneesahfurqan8544]

😂😂😂

[@spencercarter8008]

This is THE definition of a proper argument we all need to aspire to... No one-upmanship... No ego... No shouting or arguing or name calling... Just two people trying to better their understanding.

[@ALLAHDRINKSCUM]

Imagine trying to better "understand" Spiderman 😂lmao. Gtfo my guy. Cringe

[@pescatoralpursuit1726]

Naw. The kid was very condescending and disrespectful. He just hid it better.

[@falcon9213]

@@pescatoralpursuit1726 the irony of calling someone condescending and disrespectful "the kid" is amazing

[@baishihua]

​@@pescatoralpursuit1726if he "hid" it, then he is not being disrespectful in a perceivable way, how would you conclude he is being disrespectful?

[@brendencoleman439]

This is the most satisfying conversation I've seen JBP have regarding religion. O'Connor approach to pulling out Dr Peterson's personal thoughts was wonderful and very enlightening.

[@michaelbruhl]

Enlightening in the sense that it's so incredibly difficult to do. Jordan Peterson doesn't want the Christians to know what he believes.

[@JoshYng]

This is the most detailed and well-explained version of Peterson’s position on God. Finally, thank you Alex

[@Lordofthewhyz]

@@taliaeve969surely you can’t have watched this video and still have that view of him?

[@WannaBeliever]

He seems not happy about divulging this info. He interrupts quite often when talking to those he appears to disagree with (from the onset).

[@mr.goldenproductions_0143]

And yet he still managed to wiggle out of it by not answering because he "doesn't care" about his own base's frustrations with his evasiveness.

[@JoshYng]

@@taliaeve969 I understand he wants to dispel what he calls the Western conception of the word belief. But at the same time he can come off as a sophist, overcomplicating things he fully understands the meaning of. It seems his mind is naturally highly logical and cannot break those logical structures for the common person. Paul had his number in my opinion, “Claiming to be wise, they became fools”

[@LMGphilanthropy]

What are games 34? 35:18 what does that mean when we add words to fit the narrative what does that word mean? Meme. I take truth as a testimony to the truth, the channel Truth is Christ then the 1611, 1612, 1769 English Translation to the 1828 Webster’s Dictionary and the correct word of God is truth. 🤝🌞👍 KJV STRONG LMG AND THE WORD TO LOOK UP IS PHILANTHROPY BEFOREHAND THE WORDS ARE IMPORTANT, Rev 22;18,19 stuff. What Bible we don’t study and study dictate the bloodlines. 🤫🏳️💙👈🎚️🔥🆙🎵🌞🕊️

[@gilsonrocks4740]

I’m a Christian who appreciates Alex’s line of questioning and explanation here. Jordan seems to know what his religious audience is asking and still refuses to answer their questions on their terms. Alex does a good job of pressing Peterson on this.

[@johnwheeler3071]

Totally agree! Alex refused to be mesmerised by Peterson so didn't allow Petersons timely interuptions to deter him.

[@Todd_Thinks]

I've come away with much less respect for Peterson. His conception is of God is obviously a synthetic one and he's pretending he is describing the God of the Bible.

[@johnwheeler3071]

@@Todd_Thinks I am inclined to agree. I suspect Peterson knows exactly what his own beliefs are and how they significantly differ from the traditional Christian understanding. He is not prepared to be explicit about them and it is that that I find dishonest.

[@mopeybloke]

Dude, how can people stomach listening to Peterson? He always dodges every question possible and his "deeper" digressions into details are meant exclusively to obfuscate things he wishes not to answer.

[@roberthoyle1971]

If peterson has enough of these "conversations" about religion people will stop listening to him and that's a good thing. What a scammer he is how he dodges and dances without really answering the question. Alex is way to tolerant of his bs.

[@chrisaxis5043]

It seems like Alex is Jordan's therapist in this conversation

[@sabrinax4575]

😂

[@kzeriar25]

I laughed out loud literally, that's spot on

[@teresaamanfu7408]

It seems to me, that Alex was dead right with his deconstruction of Jordan Peterson a year ago. Nothing new to see here.

[@teresaamanfu7408]

How can anybody listen to Jordan Peterson? I find him to be insufferable.

[@noelhausler2911]

@@teresaamanfu7408 I would love to hear whether he thinks man has a soul as I discussed above. Neuroscience seems to challenged that view, even evangelical Philosophers like Nancy Murphy do not believe the Bible says we have a soul . See Murphy ed Whatever Happened to the Soul. There is also an interesting non-religious book The Brain That Changes Itself.

[@EPlTHANY]

A lot of the naysayers in this comment section really just didn't get a handle on this conversation. I really, really enjoyed it! I am a big fan of Alex O'Connor, increasingly so since I discovered him for his anti-monarchy views during the coronation of King Charles II, and I was a long-time fan of Jordan Peterson since I discovered his videos in 2017, though I've become increasingly less interested over the years. This conversation made me realise Peterson is still very lucid, awake, and reasonable in conversation, and it soothed my fears that he was not really able to engage with objections. It also made me realise just how formidable Alex O'Connor really is; he really stood his ground in this conversation and presented a very strong series of objections and critiques to Peterson in a way that forced him to confront some issues and clarify some points he had previously been unclear on. Thank you extremely much for making this publicly available! It was a joy to watch and a real learning experience; I feel much better from having watched it!

[@ClintLock1]

i'm in the same boat, roughly speaking

[@TheNicolombiano77]

Classic Peterson cocksucker response. Any criticism is net by 'oh you didn't understand' despite Benzo Jordans super clear cowardice when it comes to answering difficult questions. He just keeps obfuscating by deconstructing questions where everyone knows what is being asked. 'depends what your definition of 'is' is' -level of intellectual dishonesty

[@benjaminread5287]

Peterson has been about this clear already. His interview with Tom Bilyeu was very much the same. He's lost in a false modesty along the lines of 'I'm to unknowledgeable to answer these questions' when the questions are about what he believes (which as O'Connor points out he could just say 'I am unsure') but rather Peterson claims to be one of the best and most faithful interpreters of the Bible! What an extraordinary claim and proof that his modesty is quite shallow. How many more people are there that can answer these very simple questions and yet wrestle with even deeper ones. All that said, I do not completely disagree with Peterson's views, some are very helpful. But he is certainly still in this interview evasive and unclear. I don't think it is out of I'll intent, I think he's just a little unused to saying 'I don't know' and saying it properly without the fake modestly and lengthy defences.

[@masahige2344]

This is much my positionality as well. Also, you and Alex must be very old to have been around for the coronation of 1661!

[@EPlTHANY]

@@benjaminread5287 Lmfao what are you on about bro "Peterson claims to be one of the best and most faithful interpreters of the Bible!" Please show me where Peterson has made the claim "I am one of the best and most faithful interpreters of the Bible" Guys like you are so ridiculous, you just make stuff up out of thin and then believe it

[@splattek6870]

The fact that Alex is only 25 years old is shocking to me. Fascinated to see where he'll be when he's 40 or 50.

[@nuanceatnoon]

I pray that he is still this respectful in his older years. I’m 21, he had a brief adoptive phase of Hitchens in his earlier years. He has grown and has become less confrontational which is always a plus for a fruitful discussion.

[@blumusik9572]

Maybe a devout Catholic?? 😅 He is my favourite atheist by far. I enjoyed his conversations with Bishop Barron. He will go far no matter in which direction he goes.

[@Rubberglass]

The greatest apologist of the 21st century.

[@bedro_0]

He's not gonna get there. The fog is coming👹

[@richardpowell1772]

He’s a typical young philosophy student and his views on religion are where I was at in 2008 after reading Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens. He is not original.

[@VegasOriginal]

Alex asking Jordan the proper questions we Christians have wanted to ask him forever. Cheers to you both!

[@davidkodsy90]

Exactly. Alex was asking all the right questions I wanted to ask Dr. Jordan myself !

[@WannaBeliever]

He has been asked. He was finally pinned down from his squirming away

[@afro208]

Agree! needed an Atheist to ask it!

[@etagged]

I gathered that throughout the conversation, Jordan was constantly in awe of the amount of insipid stupidity required to ask him those questions. I suppose the fans got what they wanted.

[@Bythegraceofgod1646]

My thoughts exactly. Praise God for the strange & wonderful ways in which He works.

[@cadenlangford1826]

Alex O'Conner is very impressive in the way he can strip away all the verbal muck to get to the actual logical syllogisms

[@lucaxtshotting2378]

his only remarkable trait is his patience really. I would've fuck this

[@Rc-tb9uy]

I’ve listened to hundreds of religious conversations and debates, even political, and I’ve often screamed at the screen like “rephrase the question” or thinking how something could be positioned slightly different to bring clarity and certainty to views. I think I do a very good job, but Alex is incredible in this area. You gained a follower friend. God bless

[@touchoflight124]

I’m a Christian but I thoroughly enjoy listening to Alex. He articulates his ideas so clearly it’s a pleasure to listen to

[@r.the.mazzochist2259]

No way! A Christian enjoying listening to an atheist? How revolutionary 😅

[@simoncordingley3122]

@@r.the.mazzochist2259Except he’s not an atheist. On the whole, atheists aren’t worth paying attention to.

[@Thagomizer]

Yep, me too.

[@samueloak1600]

​@@jayjaychadoy9226Well, he kinda had to, he's often livelier

[@kame99023]

Mental mesturbation

[@nicolasreyes2190]

Alex is a hero. I'm convinced there are THOUSANDS of us who openly listen to both sides of this conversation and see the full merits of both. And we need more REAL bridges like Alex. If you allow me the irony, Alex you're doing God's work!

[@wannabe_scholar82]

Well said Bojack, well said.

[@aaroningl]

To add to the irony, you've offered JP zero credit. How unsurprising.

[@jeremytine]

​@@aaroninglnot irony, I find JP less intellectually honest

[@aaroningl]

@jeremytine so he seemed intellectually dishonest throughout this interview? He was digging deep throughout, as he always does, and showed far more of himself than Alex did.

[@jeremytine]

@@aaroningl to be honest I haven't watched but a small clip yet, but will when I have time. Could be possible here, dunno yet, but I made no mention in reference of this video, I was speaking in the totality of past expression of the two. I hope that clears it up for you.

[@TrueMakaveli50]

“I don’t understand it therefore I believe in it.” What a confounding thing to say.

[@palemoonlight96]

😂😂 it should be the exact opposite lol

[@facopful]

You need to believe in things you don't understand or don't know for sure. If you know something, don't need to belive it.

[@xandercorp6175]

@@facopful I understand what you mean, but consider that knowledge is justified true belief.

[@williammitchell6855]

Thats faith in a nutshell

[@three_owl_night]

@@xandercorp6175 then what is faith and why it has always been separated from the concept of knowledge?

[@AshleeLazic]

This was….easily the unbelievable, articulate, logical, and intelligent conversation I’ve ever had the honor of listening to - I am truly just blown away. I wish there was more conversation like this happening in everyday life. Just, WOW.

[@Tristangames699]

You do not realise how long I have waited for this!

[@lofidandy2189]

For real, it's all I've been looking for this week! 😅

[@AveriesMiranda]

Same 😂

[@azula3906]

Yup. Same!

[@alexanderflood1462]

same

[@andreasmartt2201]

Ditto

[@zacshifler]

Cant even imagine who and where Alex Oconnor will be in 10 years. His evolution is incredible

[@jaybee9269]

He’ll be Pope!

[@josephstalin2829]

He needs to write a book already

[@matthewbazeley2984]

I think he will be a non dualist.

[@Andre_Louis_Moreau]

My guess is he'll become his own unique version of Tom Holland?

[@jaybee9269]

@@jayjaychadoy9226 >> Nah, Alex would be a great Pope! (You know he secretly wants to be St. Paul; that’s the key to his character!)

[@keeganmoore989]

This in an Oscar level dialectic discussion, exquisitely constructed. I personally feel for Peterson in that I too have been attempting for some time to explain to my family that there is sufficient nuance to Christian belief that extends far beyond the mere objective truth of the verbal narrative. Having read many books of faith and many philosophers, I have to conclude that the fact that the biblical narrative is a meta-truth of the overarching value hierarchy of our society, makes it far more interesting, wonderful and "holy" than any objective truth that may have historically occurred. Bear your cross and aim up. Thank you for the privilege of this marvellous discussion.

[@johnofroncesvalles4255]

The father of General Semantic, Korzybski, place a limitation of words to get at objective truth as follows: “The objective level is not words, and cannot be reached by words alone. We must point our finger and be silent, or we will never reach this level.”

[@velatoget]

I find that some of Alex's biggest fans are Christians. I'm not really a "fan" of his, but I always thoroughly enjoy his discussions. 52:00 is a really funny way to poke fun at Jordan's avoidance of answering basic questions.

[@Shawn-nq7du]

JP has good reason to be skeptical on answering Alex. I watched Alex for over two years and he doesn’t appear to be interested in Christianity at all, except to make a mockery out of it. He seemed genuinely interested at first but now he looks at areas he can poke holes to challenge or weaken faith like slavery in the Bible, Herem warfare in the OT, the senses (multi-layered meaning) of Scripture. These can be understood only through the eyes of faith and within the context of the whole Bible. These are not topics for two hour debates. Hard topics appeal to the emotion over the intellect for those who are immature in their faith.

[@peaceandlove544]

I cannot stand Alex, I can see behind his polite facade his ignorance -based atheist anti-christian arrogance-grin

[@nickcoker4293]

Jordan isn’t avoiding anything. He just has a much deeper understanding levels deeper than you and he’s trying to think about all that within his answer. The fact that you don’t see this shows your ignorance.

[@velatoget]

@@nickcoker4293 No, I fully understand why. But he also dances around that question more than any other question anyone has ever asked him. It's the only time he's indirect. I'd call that avoidance, even if he thinks there's a reason for it.

[@codycastillo4131]

Hearing Jordan say "Is there a hierarchy of memes?" made my life worth living

[@marvelsandals4228]

Richard Dawkins wrote the Selfish Gene, articulating how you can make sense of the world by focusing on how the fittest genes survive, spread, replicate, and evolve over time. He also popularized the term "meme" for ideas that act in a similar way. Well, with memes its also survival of the fittest. What are the fittest memes? What is the fittest meme? It's hard to come up with an idea more fit for survival than the one true God upon which all of reality rests. How do you beat that idea? What idea could be more compelling?

[@RealBakedTahu]

It's a tossup between Pepe and Harambe.

[@GeneralProfessor]

@@RealBakedTahu o rly?

[@RealBakedTahu]

​@GeneralProfessor Pepe is the embodiment of primordial chaos, mischivism, and the spirit of rebellion. In contract, Harambe represents order. Harambe is the sacrificial guardian who lays down his life for the innocent. He is stability, wisdom, and strength.

[@codycastillo4131]

@@RealBakedTahu thank you. from the bottom of my heart, thank you

[@Rave.-]

Alex O'Connor: the world's champion of good faith arguments.

[@Rave.-]

@frankxu4795 I don't think I'd disagree, in a sense. Sometimes the best way to ease someone out of their own way is that diplomacy. His discussion with Ben Shapiro is probably one of the better examples of this.

[@Rave.-]

@frankxu4795 I think the mistake would be in thinking this is a one stop shop. Alex intends to make a career out of talking to these people. Most of the comments in this thread already mention that this is the most clarity they've ever seen out of Jordan on religion. Baby steps.

[@johannandjuanitawilliamson6669]

Undisputed

[@googledofferhas]

Yessir

[@Rave.-]

Did frank delete his comments? I don't see them anymore. Odd.

[@4330076]

Who would have ever thought an atheist would be speaking on behalf of all Christians and asking the questions all we Christians would love to ask Peterson. God’s ways are truly amazing!

[@Christful]

Facts put a end to all this, I thank Alex as a Christian

[@chriswimer6296]

Your Forrest Gump analogy is brilliant! And I think Peterson’s response just goes to show that he is desperate to avoid acknowledging the obvious framing of those types of questions and for whatever reason continue to avoid giving any real answer

[@Jmoss7]

You listened to all that and still don’t understand why he doesn’t answer those questions the way people want him to? Not meaning to be rude, I just genuinely thought this conversation cleared up a lot of that for me. JP explains basically that the people asking those questions don’t in fact understand the questions they’re asking. This has always made sense to me, but it seems that people just can’t stand that idea. Alex pushes back, and fair enough, but it seems to basically come down to - these things are too complex in their fully-realized nature to answer in a straightforward way (e.g. do you believe in God). Doing so would be inaccurate and frankly dishonest. Just my two cents! I also enjoyed the Forrest Gump analogy though, haha. Amazing conversation.

[@Emilio-np4dk]

I bet no atheist can explain to me if God isn’t real then why does the Bible exist? 😂

[@chriswimer6296]

No offense taken. And I understand where Peterson is coming from. But my issue is that he seems more eager to be elusive and confusing than to be understood. In fact at one point I believe he says something like “it’s not my problem”; well it kind of is if you want to be understood… He acknowledged here that he knows that Christians ask that type of question because their belief hinges on certain events in the Bible “actually”objectively” “historically” happening. But instead of addressing that directly he is too happy to dance circles around the question. To instead say that it is just too complex is, I think, a disingenuous dodge at best.

[@Jmoss7]

@@chriswimer6296 That’s fair enough. It seems like when he’s asked questions such as the ones we’re talking about, he makes it plenty clear to the questioner that he takes issue with the framing of their question. I think even in response to your “actually/really/historically” point, JP himself doesn’t KNOW how to answer that and is trying to figure it out. I mean we know he is particularly interested in studying meaning, morality, and religion, and he has shown in this conversation how he truly believes asking the “right” question is extremely important, especially in these areas. If “believing” whether some event happened 2000 years ago means something different to him than to the interviewer, then there is a fundamental problem and (likely) inability to reconcile these differences in the time provided. In that regard, if he truly is dancing around the question for his own self-interest, I can’t say I blame him. I wouldn’t call it being dishonest. That being said, it was amazing to finally have someone like Alex who is smart enough to keep up and ask some of the right questions on this front, and I’d be willing to bet he as a 25yo isn’t fully equipped to grasp and pry in all the right directions just yet. Looking forward to their next encounter. That’s how I see it, but maybe we simply disagree over whether or not he’s acting in good faith or being disingenuous. And whether “something happened” is always answerable with yes or no. Anyways, cheers!

[@mr-h6x]

because he wants to push christian conservativism on people but knows he can not justify the axioms. rather than admit the axioms of the faith are highly dubious, he's obfuscates that he's built his prescription for others on a foundation of feelings and myths. other moral systems and life philosophies are able to make their case without relying on religious axioms.

[@seemoremoreable]

"the skepticism should be in service of rectifying your ignorance rather than in service of making your point or winning the argument" Gem

[@simifire79]

If I would work for satan I definitely would hire such an intellectually gifted person as Alex. He is "cunning sensible smart" just as the serpent in the garden and Knowledgeable as the tree in the garden. Even Eve let the serpent close because she wasn't afraid of it at all. More likely the dialogue or the conversation between them has happened similarly as between JP and Alex. This smooth dynamic expression of his belief on this intellectual level can even drive away the "belivers" of God. Just as it has happened in the garden a test of belief=Trust based on an individual DECISION. The tree of Knowledge was offered versus of God very Existence for to make a decision. That's from satan and allowed by God. Why is that? satan aim was to put her trust in Knowledge rather in He who created that Knowledge of tree. So in other-words that was for Eve destruction from satan. As result of a taste of the Knowledge her follower Adam was convince by her's Knowledge to drive away his trust from his creator. satan was clapping & smiling but he didn't know God's plan which was CREATED in Love but yet to FORM in His creation. Therefore is impossible for satan to know the secret of Love as he has no access in that "field" because the love is not in Him. God wants His spirits to be trust in Him not despise Him. God wants to be in Love with His spirits and not to be the other way. God wants to teaching us throughout our own conclusion this is why Jesus was always questions those who wasn’t understand Him. What is Love ? Is it the nature of God. Revelation: Love is a DECISION of an relationship in truth unconditionally. This what God teaching us and demonstrated in John 3:16. Eve could have ask God of reason of her doubt but she didn't look any relationship with Him. So the Love failed in her. Adam could have run to God after he ate it, but he was hidding rather looking for relationship even blamed God. The God of forgiveness questioned Adam as a opportunity to confess his disobedience. So the love failed in Adam. God's plan was Jesus the perfect Love. Jesus was tempted in everyways but His Love remained in Him so the nature of God was chosen by a decision. The Love was successful in Jesus. So therefore He is the example of Gods nature this is what God's spirit looking for.... That's why is the only way to God's relationship is Jesus. So Love is a DECISION of an relationship in truth unconditionally. The Way The Truth the Life makes perfect sense. The difference of JP and Alex is exactly "conceptualised" in the service. JP has a heart which feels the other spirits deeply and genuinely in service, while He "wrestling with God" to understand it in full spectrum. That's impossible but because of the constant wrestling he stronger every day. In the other hand Alex with his catch phrase "seem to me" cold heart who has no genuine intentions to understand God and help to the others with his service as well. However He said it He has it but as his fruit shows that he has not at all. His work is only for himself and only for his comfort . As Jesus said "by their fruit ye shall know them" He also said "You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. Alex trying to prove his belief of atheism and disprove the belief of God. As this happens intellectually on high level, therefore his purpose very sophisticatedly hidden. Even he convinced chatGPT of God existence. This wasn't because of the service of God or genuinely looking for Him but to disprove Him as even an AI can be "fooled" by a such thing as God existence. The spirit of confusion is not from God but the spirit of discernment. Very very clever..👏 He is for those belivers whose close to God just as Adam and Eve were at the time of genesis. Did the serpent beguile Eve? Many "believers" are amazed beguiled or charmed of his smooth kind friendly manner even recognise him as a nice person who talks about God, yet he constantly against God. So God let him to be cunning sensible and smart just as for the serpent for at least the above mentioned reasons. Paul also wrote about him therefore the evil can use such spirits: "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man... (This image would be in his mind) I pray for that God Bless Alex and JP spirits with His Truth everyday. Let their heart never be comforted in lies but in Truth in this way they shall know their right pathway to their creator. Amen🙏

[@JamesJessenfedden]

@@simifire79Could you expand on this?

[@anter4203]

@@simifire79 Ok, cultist.

[@chrishead02]

⁠@@simifire79 To speak so ill of someone genuinely attempting to understand JP demonstrates your bias, your unwillingness to further understand, and that you belong to that christian camp or team that JP spoke rather contemptuously of in the beginning. This is very basic logic and deconstruction. To compare it to anything else is unwise sir. Please be respectful

[@simifire79]

@JamesJessenfedden What do you mean of expand on this topic? (Kindly questioning) I mean this topic is very deep I would say eventually the essence of the message from the Bible. My comment was about to discern the spirits. I found JP spirit for benefiting the others to become close to the Truth. However I found Alex spirit non beneficial to the others. Alex's conceptions of God is closed while JP conceptions is open. One is on his adventure of discovering the Truth, while the other believes he knows already the Truth and try to prove that. One will greatly benefit of the journey while the other is benefited of those who seeking or mining the Truth. JP clearly said He doesn't really knows whats going ...on but he definitely perceiving something which he couldn’t answer. Alex absolutely convinced, there is no doubt in him of his beliefs in atheism. The point was to see how the serpent could fool Eve by a smooth kindly cunning sensible high intellectual level of conversation when eventually God was the subject. The results was to drive away her from God just as Alex results is to take further not closer to the Truth anyone who listens him. He must knows this deep in himself but he believes=Trust in his knowledge and he doesn’t really care the others. if just 1% "chance" is God exists and he drove away many from Him how he considered the others with care. JP is the opposite as He also intellectually gifted but doesn't work against God to disprove Him. He even pursues the others to seek Him. The Love is missing of Alex because thats God's nature. "Coincidentally" this is connect to the Genesis account in the Garden. (There is no coincidence in the Kingdom of God) As the Love was missing from Adam and Eve. It was created but couldn't be in a form in them as their decision was block it by the serpent helps" of Eve desire. I believe in her the desire of the limited knowledge was chosen rather than God's nature = Love. Which was the limitations of her potential. If I think of my own desires between God's nature then I can limit my potential in "xxx-sites" everyday. Therefore that day I wouldn't be looking for God's relationship but rather hide in shame. If I was then I would need to confess my sin and then after days I should feel bad myself if my desire would drive me there again to my sin So to be with my sinful nature as I desire I have to chose to cut off the God's nature as Love wich is relationship with God. Otherwise I should say everyday to God "ohhh I'm sorry for...." and that is would become hard and harden day by day. Or I just would saying that "I'm sorry for.. but not meant to be that... so I would be in lie then I'm again not in Truth so not in Love. Therefore my potential would reach the top because its end up wherever or whatever is manifested in my desire. Food drink or any addiction of a sinful nature... Unfortunately we all failing time to time from God's standard but God asking us throughout our conscience just as He asked Adam even when he was hidding. So we can be in Relationship with Him but needs to be in Truth and that is Unconditionaly. But if we lie , deny the Truth how He could keep us in relationship where He knows we are lying in order to have access to His benefits and we are not interested in Him. This is what the gold digger do. The perfect Love was not formed in human until Jesus. The Love isn't a feeling but a decision. If would be feeling then today would be different as tomorrow concerning Love. The feeling is the manifestation of Love in various ways. I hope that makes sense but please contact to the main source as confirmation to your spirit.🙏 God is Love Love is a DECISION not a feeling God is a decision not a shaky feeling. God bless you richly 🙏

[@Wonkysquare]

Alex clarified Sam Harris' arguments about morality better than anyone else ever has, and he's just done the same with Peterson's position on God and truth. He's one of the most impressive conversationalists of our time.

[@melissasw64]

Where have you heard Alex clarify Harris' arguments? I would like to hear that. I don't understand Harris at all past the point that he thinks Christians are stupid. I would seriously like to understand his argument.

[@goodvibes-gy3jn]

@@melissasw64if that’s what you understand about Sam you were emotionally triggered by something he said and were unable to actually listen any further. I can guarantee you he’s never said Christian’s are stupid. I don’t even think he thinks that. He’s specifically discussed the rather interesting seeming paradox of highly intelligent religious people.

[@melissasw64]

@@goodvibes-gy3jn I can't remember who he debated, but by the end of the debate, Sam was attacking Christianity. To be honest I don't remember if he used the word "stupid," but it was clear that is how he feels about Christians and I wondered by he didn't attack Muslims or Buddhists or some other religion. I really just wanted to understand his explanation for objective morality without God. If you can point me in the direction of a good explanation of his theory, I am truly interested.

[@roysherwin9348]

​@melissasw64 there's no such thing as objective morality without God.

[@MasterChakra7]

Harris criticized every form on monotheism and religion for some shared reasons and some specific reasons. He has criticized Judaism despite being of Jewish heritage himself and criticized Islam despite the fear-induced climate that has been brought upon the entirety of the Western world, as well as being called a racist and a xenophobe even by his peers, as everyone who criticizes the religion of peace is. I highly suggest you actually look up his debates (free on KZbin) and read his books, you will find that his position and his articulation of it is the most reasonable anyone has put forward in the last 30 years.

[@stigm1318]

the end of this conversation makes my heart melt..even tho they dont believe in same thing , they respecet and love eachother

[@karolinafoulger649]

Oh that was de-li-cious!!! Dr Peterson's talks on God are normally too advanced for me to understand so it was great to have Alex ask the exact questions that pop into my head when im listening to Jordan. Beautifully done, so respectful... it was a pleasure to listen to it

[@AimingAtYou]

Don't have kids

[@teekydeeky]

@@AimingAtYou projection, 100%

[@picturebreakdown]

Wait, wasn’t this supposed to be Jordan interviewing Alex? This felt like the complete opposite and I loved it 😂

[@Aipocalypse-ut7du]

A maniac wearing a maniacal getup. Our civilization is one for.

[@jon_doran]

Lol Alex totally took the wheel and Jordan went along for the ride

[@aaroningl]

Seriously, left to pick Alex's ideas apart, this interview wouldn't have taken 5 minutes.

[@Monkey-fv2km]

Alex is an excellent interviewer, whilst Jordan (whilst an excellent lecturer) isn't a good interviewer... So it's probably not surprising.

[@graybonesau]

@@aaroningl What are you on about? Alex interviews people--that's kind of his thing.

[@treakfly]

So glad these two sat down to speak

[@GiovanniAdami]

I'm glad it's now and not 3-4 years ago.

[@benniheme2you]

​@@GiovanniAdamiwhy?

[@GiovanniAdami]

@@benniheme2you Because Alex has matured and become more open minded.

[@johns2220]

Alex needs to sit down with Bernardo Kastrup and the empirical evidence he has found against materialism. He paints himself as an 'always the truth' seeker type guy, but is ignoring a whole swathe of empirical evidence against his frame of seeing things. I'm not sure if it's intentional because he knows it would prove him wrong, or he's simply not aware of the data.

[@Jin-hz1eq]

​@@johns2220isn't empirical evidence material? So there is evidence undermining the evidence its giving, huh?

[@Pmoneyy77]

Jordan constantly racking his brain and contorting himself during this podcast, truly shows how passionate and committed to articulating his idea as clear as humanly possible. Alex did a masterful job at helping pull that out of him. Can’t wait until they sit down again!

[@markkroese5867]

I love how well put together Alex stays while being very respectful towards Jordan. He really tries to listen and follow Jordan's thinking process which is an admirable way of approaching a conversation. Well done to both.

[@EmperorsNewWardrobe]

I was noticing how many interjections there were in this conversation, but I quickly realised it’s not attempts to dominate, rather lots of enthusiastic ‘sparks’ about the ideas. Very refreshing actually!

[@elycetyler1942]

Must be just me. It’s so hard for me to follow when JBP interrupts so much.

[@user-eb9me1ie7z]

​@@elycetyler1942you're not alone here.

[@iamdanielmonroe]

Yea I think oftentimes JP does interrupt out of excitement and sometimes it’s relevant and deepens the conversation and other times it veers it off of the initial course it was going.

[@cliftut]

I think this is an important point, and this is often the case with Peterson, I don't think it's usually attempts to dominate, but sparks of interest and also sometimes attempts to clarify what area of interest he's trying to get at. He catches flak for it because it annoys some people, but I'm not sure it can be solidly categorized as a weakness on his part, because I think it's a side effect of how he thinks to some degree, which is part of how he arrived at where he is. However, it's true it doesn't flow as naturally in some conversations, and it's not clear to me there's an easy solution there. Some say "just let the other person talk", but what of the fact the conversation is for Peterson's channel, and he has limited time and may never talk to this person again? Claims that he's doing something wrong will have to be more useful than "stop interrupting", because annoying some people a bit isn't always evidence that you're doing something wrong. I dunno. I'm not decided on this. I think it would be interesting if an interviewer as incisive as Alex could really question Peterson about this, using specific examples.

[@elycetyler1942]

I’m not meaning it as a criticism against Jordan, I think he’s absolutely wonderful. Just doesn’t work for my brain - I’m listening to his conversation partner, making a point and I’m trying to connect and follow that point, and when he interrupts, my brain isn’t ready to shift with him. It’s jarring, it means I am less mentally adroit than others that I can’t just roll with it, but I can’t

[@Bythegraceofgod1646]

Great work, Alex. As a Christian, I thoroughly & deeply appreciated your commitment to pressing into the sincere beliefs of Christianity.

[@CleverGirlAAH]

Yes!! I personally know people have had their frustrations with Peterson on the very task Alex set out to answer. (Count me among them on points as well)

[@DANGJOS]

​@@CleverGirlAAH Alex is notoriously good at pressing people on points that others rarely do, for whatever reason. He's a great discussionist (if I may make up a word) for that reason.

[@CodamATW]

@@DANGJOS interlocutor is the word you’re looking for.

[@DANGJOS]

@@CodamATW Thank you!

[@cdv5514]

I LOVED this conversation. Probably in my top 5 podcasts ever. They took the most interesting angle to determine the shape, means and ends of one's faith. Two or three "ahhh" moments. Alex has a brilliant mind, and is a pleasure to discuss with, apparently. As a quite spiritual, "close-to-christian" individual, this was exactly what I needed. Thank you.

[@Shawn-nq7du]

What did you love about it?

[@cdv5514]

@@Shawn-nq7du It's been 8 days. I'd only give you a very generic answer at this point. I'd watch it again, but not now, just to answer your question. What did you like about it ?

[@Shawn-nq7du]

@@cdv5514 I did not like it. I didn’t like the way Alex tried to force him to answer the way he thought a Christian should answer.

[@deadhead657]

Can everyone please protect this beautiful man, this beautiful mind?! He can say the most trivial yet articulate things I've ever heard and almost bring me to tears, regularly.... pointing to many problems I must have going on. I'm here though, I'm trying. Thank you

[@NorthCountry84]

As a Catholic, Cosmic Skeptic is just what JP needed. And when it was said that JP was drunk on symbols was funny.

[@blumusik9572]

The conversation between Alex and Bishop Barron equally interesting.

[@CleverGirlAAH]

I've had these same issues with Peterson for a long time. I had hoped that Stephen Fry (a literature expert) had put to task the way Alex has. It's a fantastic conversation. And I thank Alex for being relentlessly par for the course on his inquisition. 🙏

[@MultipleGrievance]

He is that, but in the end it's metaphor he's drunk on....

[@stvbrsn]

I don’t there’s anything wrong with being “drunk on symbols” especially when you consider that most of the rest of the world has built up a pretty high tolerance against symbols.

[@XanaxMilf]

Daaammnm he got Jordan Peterson very red and stressed 😭😭😭

[@gedde5703]

Jordan saying "maybe" to Alex with regards to his unwillingness to die for the belief in the existence of the chair really made me chuckle. That was a great moment (11:05).

[@crowbar_the_rogue]

One of my favourite moments was Peterson talking about Richard Dawkins at 33:40

[@russelllaviolette7515]

Agree! Just 12:35 in, and this point is critical. If a tyrannical government were to develop who denied the existence of chairs; you, as a carpenter, might just be willing to die.

[@XanaxMilf]

Jordan didn’t seem happy to be asked what he actually means coz a lot of what he says is vague

[@Anonymous.Wisper]

I always had that mentality. People like to ask.. "would you kill someone". I say we probably all would if it meant we would live instead of dying. Any person with a gun to their head would probably kill someone else

[@avengingme]

​@@Anonymous.Wisper There are a lot of people that would just die and not fight back. Demoralized people often won't defend themselves out of disbelief for what is happening in the moment.

[@Qampfer]

What a stimulating respectful conversation. Letting Alex O’Connor challenge Dr. Peterson’s opinions, was a great listen. Both the questions and the answers brought great insight to me, and the way Dr. Peterson accepted the questions in good faith, and answered truthfully, only goes to show his extensive understanding of the topic.

[@JamesN16]

This is a great conversation and I appreciate finally understanding JP’s position on religion. That being said, Alex’s question about the police questioning Peterson about a crime that he was a witness to would be an amazing comedy sketch that writes itself.

[@Coffeeisnecessarynowpepper]

Doctor Peterson, my name is detective Wolf. I am leading investigator to this criminal alleged criminal, whom is accused of stealing the cucumber from the local Walmart. Did you witness this man still be cucumber? Jordan. Peterson, will it depends on what you mean by witness? It depends on what you mean by cucumber. It depends on you. What you mean by you.

[@josephmatin2773]

I have followed Alex for about 6 years, and for 6 years have been waiting for this conversation. Thoroughly enjoyed it.

[@VaughanMcCue]

He has Jesus waiting behind the magic curtain.

[@isthispodracingg]

Alex really did a magnificent job at getting some solid answers out of Peterson in regard to the resurrection - He knew exactly how to phrase his questions without coming off as hostile or adversarial.

[@ThaRiddler25]

And yet we’re still left unsure of what Jp’s position is entirely.

[@isthispodracingg]

@@ThaRiddler25 yes, but I think Alex has gotten closer than anyone to this point in time

[@deviouskris3012]

@@ThaRiddler25Alex at least got road runner into a canyon. Most people can’t even get him off the road.

[@oleolesen2672]

Lol

[@ThaRiddler25]

@@isthispodracingg it was a joke 😄

[@tjwhalan]

Heart warming to see two of my favourite people having an awesome conversation with nothing but respect and looking for the truth of the issue. Legends!

[@dyllansimpson4909]

Wow. If only we had more conversations like this instead of arguments. It makes you wonder where the world would be or where it's going with more people with access to this example being shown.

[@shreyaathalye2069]

“You but not me” - said at around 45:24 was hilarious. I love Alex’s sense of humor. Dr. Peterson also seemed appreciative of it haha.

[@max_mittler]

I read this comment exactly as this moment happened. lovely synchronicities

[@PFCAutostart]

I actually read this as a double entenderé. In that, you can know you are real and know and not know the things around you are real depending on your epistomology.

[@user-ki4xw2rb8q]

I wonder if Jordan has watched the video that Alex did about him

[@shreyaathalye2069]

@@user-ki4xw2rb8q If you’re talking about the video essay Alex made, Jordan said towards the beginning of the video that he watched it “this morning”. So I would assume yes.

[@user-ki4xw2rb8q]

@@shreyaathalye2069 I just kept watching and ended up seeing that part. Yeah, he did watch it. I wish he talked about his opinion on Alex calling him an atheist lol

[@nickyoung9716]

If I could have picked any two people in the world to have a conversation, it would have been these two brilliant thinkers. As a Christian and a huge fan of both Dr. Peterson and Alex O'Connor, I want to sincerely thank them for making this happen. It has been such a treat.

[@ONETimothy2.12-14]

You a Christian or an agnostic?

[@user-qi7xx5ih6z]

As an atheist I appreciate them too.

[@user8153]

You’d be missing out on so much

[@whynot1548]

O'Conner? "Brilliant Thinker?" 🤔 .. He's seems pretty expected and generic to me.

[@gemkid85]

Jordan peterson is a great thinker?​@@whynot1548

[@davefordham14]

I do like Alex a lot actually. He has a talent for phrasing complicated things in such a way as to leave no doubt about what he means or what he's asking. An exemplary conversation which I enjoyed very much. Dr Peterson was also excellent.

[@Trip6IX502]

Alex managed to attain the clearest answer of what Jordan actually believes. Great work Alex and awesome conversation to witness.

[@Lions4322]

Alex O'Connor is absolutely brillant. I really appreciated this conversation. I've seldom seen Jordan Peterson become interested in this way, where he listens and Alex inquires in a good-faited and clinical manner.

[@NP1066]

Yeah Peterson was clearly highly stimulated and excited by the "brain picking" Alex was applying on him. And it was very helpful that Alex is just as sharp, precise and witty as Peterson himself is.

[@nicolasbascunan4013]

Not brilliant. He didn’t even express his own thoughts while being inquisitive about Jordan’s.

[@Lions4322]

@@nicolasbascunan4013 Alex O'Connor stated early on in the conversation that one of his main goals is to try to get a good grasp of Peterson's view. Peterson can't properly navigate his own view, and more than once did he say that he doesn't care if people understand him. An inquiry like this was therefore much needed. If you want Alex O'Connors view, he has his own channel. Go check it out.

[@samehatt5171]

Oh boy, here we go..

[@jaughnekow]

Getting my pop corn

[@Telonious_Terp]

Exactly what I thought 😂

[@mr.knownothing33]

Right! It finally happened 🤯 🍿

[@grantparker6092]

@@user_xsr Good thing Jordan Peterson never does that right?

[@grandpa7278]

I've seen Jordan Peterson mad, wouldn't want him mad at me, he can be brutal. Lol And when he's done verbally shredding me, he'd beat me up! He's a scrapper! little fighter 😊

[@crazynoob3]

When I saw this episode pop up I couldn't wait to watch it. I've been following Jordan and Alex for years, and knew that it was going to be a stellar conversation between two titans coming from very different points of view. But even with that high bar of expectation, I was honestly blown away. This was probably the best podcast episode or video about religion - or perhaps more accurately, the Bible - that I've ever watched. I know that I will end up watching this again and again in the future and I'm left hungry for more. Thanks to both for the innumerable references for further reading material, and can't wait for the next one!

[@motermonkey]

There is a yin and yang to these conversations that some people just miss. It’s great to see some of that spoken and clarified. It’s great discourse over tense subjects. We need more of this in our culture. More!

[@threatened2024]

40 minutes in and Alex has drawn the most clarity out of JP on this issue, but credit to JP for independently making good points.

[@th3nobodi3]

JP has always been clear, he didn't said anything new at all that he hadn't said before using the same analogies and the same stories, nearly. But Alex did much better and pushing the conversation along than Harris/Dawkins because he already knows the Christian traditions well. So the ideas flow much more naturally.

[@user-ut3dy5jz6s]

In what way go look at his content he believes Islamic channels who hate Jews and they spread fake media about Israel

[@mastermachetier5594]

@@th3nobodi3Peterson is great at using a lot of words to say nothing of meanings it’s really astonishing to watch .

[@th3nobodi3]

@@mastermachetier5594 what was unclear to you? the ideas are fairly clear to me.

[@kevinkanzler495]

​@@mastermachetier5594is it fair to assume you respect Alex? It's clear he understands what Peterson is getting at.

[@ChristopherCopeland]

God, (no pun intended) Alex speaking with Jordan is f*king Christmas morning. He's pushing all the questions I've wished others would pry for and Jordan is giving me all the gifts I expected he might and then some. Thanks, guys. This is the clarity on linguistic ontology nearly nobody has seemed to even have the words or notion to triangulate, let alone extract from JP.

[@carlosderegil8674]

What about the last hard question ? I’m kind of wondering why was it so hard ? . Well Alex has been reading Thomas , and the so called forgotten narratives of the New Testament , which I don’t care , but , yes I do care if it is on a debate . Aren’t you ?

[@Wattyb2]

You’re lauding JBP for answering a question? That’s kind of….pathetic?

[@ChristopherCopeland]

@@Wattyb2 No, I’m lauding Alex for asking the right questions. As Jordan says, (paraphrasing) he usually can’t answer the question in the full capacity he’d like to because he knows the people asking the questions don’t have the framework to know what he means. Also it’s exhausting and time consuming to answer so I don’t blame him for usually not trying to dive into it. I had this conversation with my mom when we talked about my beliefs on the phone the day before this came out. It’s a conversation killer lol

[@KgRu1eS]

I really enjoyed this conversation. Thanks to Alex also for probing JP further so we can understand him. There's a lot I need think about from this conversation.

[@StaticSilence1]

I've been waiting for this conversation for quite some time now. You can see how engaged they both are. I knew this would happen. Two intellectuals speaking in the same language.

[@abisal_gergiev]

Surgical precision with the questions from Alex. Really helps unwrap Petersons worldview. Love both men, thanks!

[@FartPanther]

Peterson's world view can be summarised here: 😂 1:33:14

[@FartPanther]

1:45:52 He describes his method of garbage collection: "make patterns where the data doesn't even match based on what feels most profound"

[@XanaxMilf]

I don’t think Peterson liked getting unwrapped it’s like he was always withholding some things. It’s like Alex had a sharp knife and smoothly cut the wrapping and unravelled it

[@jeane0253]

So far, one thing stands out: This conversation is quite a lot better than previous conversations Peterson had with non-theists. Something about Alex's attitude, character and quite frankly, intelligence, brings out the best in Peterson. It just shows that militant atheists and militant religious people are much more alike than those who prefer to not play a group game, but a knowledge extraction game. I was kindof personally unhappy with Peterson's form of late (politics, deranged rants, etc.). This is more like it, feels like 2018 again.

[@TrunksG-or4s]

I see what you mean but I feel like people need to evolve. Talking about politics was the natural next step but this doesn't mean you're wrong.

[@martinarooney6102]

Jordon is seeing through today's world twisted underlying tyranny. Long may he speak sense. Regarding his understanding of God, that's his journey and he sees much truth at times.

[@paigedevine5796]

Agree 100% I respect a desire to talk on politics but I believe that recently it’s left a lot less time for Peterson’s best areas like philosophy and religion.

[@Deifiable]

@@TrunksG-or4sthere’s no problem with talking about politics, but the kind of extremism tribalism Peterson has been gravitating towards these past few years has been hugely disappointing compared to the calm, curious, reasonable demeanor he approached some topics with in the past. It’s not the political talk, it’s the nature of the political talk.

[@TrunksG-or4s]

@@Deifiable well again personally I'm a fan but I completely understand if you're not and I'm sorry that you miss older times. But I'm someone who's politically active and I'm guessing a lot of old listeners are apolitical. Remember if something isn't your cup of tea, don't force yourself into it.

[@dwolfcoach]

Alex is the quintessential "interrogator" of other people's thoughts. I find it refreshing how calm and clear he is in his questioning. I have to believe he has worked through his own thinking w the same scrutiny.

[@andrelindor1775]

Truly brilliant discussion. I appreciate that there was neither intellectual ass kissing nor close minded attacks. Very refreshing to listen to a discussion of intellectual honesty with an appropriate level of push and pull. Well done.

[@kurtglathar5162]

This is much more conversation than a debate, and a lot more productive because no one is trying to win or intellectually dominate the other.

[@RinZ3993]

Which can all be attributed to Alex. His demeanor put Peterson in this place

[@aaroningl]

More of a Q+A than a conversation.

[@kurtglathar5162]

@@aaroningl They aren't mutually exclusive

[@mejsjalv]

Sure thing... but it would have been awesome if they end up in a fist fight with each other, ya know, Jerry Springer style, calling each other names. Now that would have broken the internet for a while. But well, civilised conversation it is.

[@sniperpupper616]

​@@aaroningla Q + A is a form of conversation is it not?

[@BrianDeCosta]

Holy smokes, it seems Jordan has met his match, and he realizes it. He's speaking with a rare openness and level of respect towards Alex. I suspect this will be the first of many conversations!

[@Arareemote]

Alex, an atheist brought out civility and respect from William Lane Craig for crying out loud lmao. That's how you know his oratory and ability is at a high level.

[@Memfys]

If anyone can pierce through the famous JP word salad armour, it's Alex.

[@tsad5611]

Alex lets him off the hook more than most.

[@NP1066]

I felt this exact same thing as well. I came into this conversation very casually, obviously being interested and excited, but nothing too special. But as I started listening I began noticing this one was unique, precisely because of how you described it. "Met his match". And I'm here for it. My hope is that this conversation and hopefully future conversations between them, will generate cross-pollination and stimulation, which will grow to enhance and inspire both intellectually. This genuine "picking of the brain" state of discussion can really act as a true fertile ground for the growth of new ideas.

[@capitalb5889]

​@@MemfysI noticed that JP did not retreat inside his word salad armour and used normal speech.

[@Collective_Unconscious_]

“People will do anything, no matter how absurd, in order to avoid facing their own souls. One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious.” ― Carl Jung

[@ozleyfiles]

I’ve been taking my time listening to this one and enjoying every minute thank you! ❤

[@user-wn1kq8jx5q]

I could never have imagined Alex and Jordan would have or could have this much chemistry. Alex brought out the Peterson I feel like I first was entranced by a few years back but haven’t seen in forever. This conversation was so appreciated.💚

[@galindoof]

Yeah, the chemistry: water and oil

[@user-wn1kq8jx5q]

@@galindoof you must be new to Jordans content. As someone who’s consumed almost all of both of theirs over the last few years and seen Jordan live twice, once while a huge fan and follower and again just a few weeks ago no longer a follower but there for different reasons, I can say with full confidence this wasn’t an oil meets water chemistry. Alex was able to so successfully lower Jordan’s defenses and create an atmosphere more agreeable to Jordan than any other atheist coming with the same questions ever has that - lo and behold…. he gave us a side of Jordan and answers to questions put to Jordan a million times over we’ve never seen nor heard. The denial of this is an admittance of a lack of knowledge or experience with Jordan’s content and history. You needn’t take my word for it. A couple minute breeze through the comment section shows hundreds of people grateful for Alex giving us a Jordan some of the best of the best that came before couldn’t come close to introducing us to. But you and I both know these words will fall on deaf ears because you’re just here for contrarian purposes.. my boredom this Friday night got you a response all the same.

[@user-wn1kq8jx5q]

@@jayjaychadoy9226 two things here. One, if the redness his face reached in this discussion scared you I highly recommend you don’t watch literally any other conversation he’s had with an opposing interlocutor.. as this was both the most mild and productive. Second. If the level of redness his face turned during this was scary at all to you I suggest bubble wrap before going outside, ear muffs and an adult.

[@nikosdrosos1194]

Two thinkers with different underlying conclusions that can have an actual conversation without wanting to kill each other. Impressive

[@zman0894]

I love discussions like this! Thanks, Dr. Peterson!

[@Nyghl0]

This conversation is probably the best for Jordan that he's ever had, for getting him to clarify his position on religion. Alex has really helped him a lot here.

[@Blate1]

A clash between two top tier representatives of their respective world views. Love it.

[@ymb2191]

@@twilekcustodian You have just responded negatively to an innocent and positive statement. That says something about you

[@Blate1]

@@twilekcustodian you think recognizing that two people are good at what they do and are both highly respected public figures from different backgrounds means I must idolize them as gods? What an interesting psychology you must have.

[@virtualsnake1994]

@@twilekcustodian what does gods even mean?

[@valeirr_]

i wouldn’t call it a clash

[@tgenov]

Framing it as a "clash" says more about your (conflicted?) state of mind than it does about the mutually-respectful dialogue.

[@ColeReadman]

@CosmicSkeptic Fantastic work here in this conversation. Of the last 6 years of listening to Peterson carefully and trying to get a read on his true beliefs concerning religion, you've done the absolute best job i've seen of managing to get Jordan to distill his ideas and beliefs down into a digestible and understandable format. Well done. This conversation was incredible.

[@TrunksG-or4s]

To be honest, how could you not have understood his views years ago?

[@martinarooney6102]

Watch other Jordon Peterson videos, he explajns a lot more in them, other ones are more enlightening...

[@user-wn1kq8jx5q]

@@martinarooney6102certainly not. Point us that way, we’ll be waiting.

[@shelovinthecrew]

@@TrunksG-or4s because he Gish gallops constantly every answer is laden with obfuscation and motte and Bailey

[@adamsmith307]

​@@shelovinthecrewFFS - was you actually listening to a single word he said??

[@olafdebruin3440]

I want thank you both for you incredibly civilized and rational discussions. Your conversations have introduced me to new concepts that I find valuable and insightful., where the words may be spaced further apart for me than you (Her reference) , but within those spaces, I'm catching up . Thank you for providing such thoughtful and enlightening content

[@CGKey]

I'm sure many will agree with me when I say this is probably the best conversation someone has had with JP about these subjects. Alex pressed dr. Peterson exactly on the points he is often ambiguous about and made him clarify what he actually thinks, which is immensely helpful.

[@nb4411]

I tend to agree with Petersons worldview more, but Alex is extremeley good faith, extremely intelligent, and very percise in his language. This should be a great discussion.

[@trinchuzosparty]

Spot on. Same goes for me. I disagree with Alex here and there (I agree with him on certain topics) but I feel he is intellectually honest (super scarce stuff nowadays) and always running himself with the best intentions.

[@en9a9eperelandra80]

The interesting question is what is "good faith" really? ;) I think Alex unpacks that within the interview he does of Jordan, which was really interesting to watch because it was supposed to be Jordan interviewing Alex.

[@matthewzang6688]

Peterson’s flowery word salads serve to obfuscate more than elucidate the points he’s trying to make. He often jumps back and forth between literal truth and literary/ metaphorical truth, and blurs the line in a misleading way. He seems to conflate them or use them interchangeably, and it’s very disorienting at times. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that people often feel even more confused after hearing JP on certain issues (or dismiss it as too “profound” for us stupid peasants), but understand the clear and succinct argumentation of someone like Alex. Someone should always strive to explain complex issues with simplicity and clarity, not complicate it to an excessive degree. Keep in mind, JP also said you can only induce smoking cessation through mystical experiences on mushrooms, and also encouraged young and immature women to have children because they don’t know what they want or who they are yet. Just demonstrably wrong and asinine.

[@soccerplayer922]

@@matthewzang6688 Materialists who don't know they're materialists are often confused.

[@bogdanpopescu1401]

@@matthewzang6688 the immaturity is subjective; statistically it's better for women to have children if they are in a stable relation, and it's better to have them younger; and better for the children too; not to mention the consequences for society and the fact that we are in the middle of a demographic catastrophe; calling a common sense advice "demonstrably wrong and asinine" only shows how confused and demoralized the western world has become

[@fpalisse]

Alex really gets Peterson to break down his ideas on god and the bible more than anyone else I've ever seen

[@willp2877]

& they still don't make sense! Lol

[@MiKo97100]

​@@willp2877get a life bro 😂

[@brunolopes2205]

​@@willp2877maybe you just wasted 2 hours listening to something you didnt have the tools to understand. Sorry

[@willp2877]

@@MiKo97100 I was happy burning 3 seconds of my life to reply to this comment, thanks. Free will in action! (Or is that its own can of worms?). It was a small thrill.

[@willp2877]

@@brunolopes2205 I admit, I'm no Tim the toolman Taylor, but I have a Home Depot in my local area. Please compile a list of tools I may be lacking for my collection to help better understand. Probably a hammer? To help... better nail a point? (JP might be in more need of a hammer). Or how about some bits to help better... drill these mega brain University of Toronto level concepts into my skull? About how really old popular myths/fiction somehow eclipse reality, historical records and common sense because it's old and popular enough? I understand his argument well enough. I am just not convinced. I also thought his point about Hamlet hurt his argument big time. But he seemed as if he thought that point was a slam dunk.

[@DaboooogA]

The most engaging JBP discussion in quite a while - much appreciated.

[@burmdog]

A masterclass on how to speak with Jordan Peterson. You really did your homework and forced clarity from him because of it. I think both Alex and Jordan should be pleased with the outcome of the talk.

[@zcuric]

As a catholic, I followed Jordan for a lot of years and seen him with in a bunch of podcasts and interviews with Catholics, most recently in podcast Pints With Aquinas with Matt Fradd, but Alex O'Connor in 30 minutes pulled out from Jordan the best answers about God and religion. Thank you for that @CosmicSkeptic! I hope Matt Fradd invites to the podcast or Jimmy Akin. :)

[@panbye]

I thought this was a great addendum to the Fradd show. I might have to listen to it again and see if I get something different out of it after this.

[@aaroningl]

Alex didn't pull anything out. Jordan has been reiterating the same philosophy for years now. He has hours of footage saying the very same thing.

[@paulaaron4821]

@@aaroningl So you got nothing new out of this conversation? I'd say you should watch again. Jordan's beliefs have grown over the years, so there is definitely more to learn by listening to him.

[@aaroningl]

@@paulaaron4821 I got something out of it, for sure. I always do. But JP dug down into himself far more than Alex managed to. However, I do feel that Alex was reluctant to acknowledge the education he was being given.

[@lisajones1438]

I spent the entire video feeling as if the interviewer was being interviewed.

[@normaodenthal8009]

It’s great to see Alex, an atheist, take the time to put a lot of research and reflection into religious matters instead of rejecting religious beliefs without any knowledge about what is actually being rejected. A superb interview that is interesting, informative, and insightful. A masterclass on how an interview should be conducted. Well done!

[@NP1066]

It's not simply an interview. It's a brain storm battle of the minds. Sounds hyperbolic I know, but I truely felt that was the case with just how excited and stimulated both of them were to reallly hone the concepts and ideas each of them presented.

[@capitalb5889]

Alex has a degree in theology, and spent three years studying it exclusively at Oxford University, so it's not surprising he knows a few things.

[@mrrubin8131]

I would argue that a lot of atheist are highly knowledgeable about religion. It's usually where atheism starts for people.

[@kenkilos]

​@@mrrubin8131Nah. A lot of them are disillusioned about religion and want to act out and "Epic own" religious people.

[@mrrubin8131]

@@kenkilos I don't think you have talked to many of us...

[@deltamonarch3624]

one of my favorite conversations of all time. i couldn't look away.

[@kennerkeyz]

just incredible. we need more of these two together. thank you both so much.

[@sentensi]

Dr Peterson has definitely moved forward with his thinking. It’s now a Biblical Library rather than a corpus.

[@scythediee7472]

😂😂😂

[@carel-bartviljoen3465]

I understood that reference 😂

[@theimmoralcookie6344]

I'm so happy Alex turned the discussion towards Dr. Peterson and we have mutual discussion that is on equal footing.

[@dbarson473]

That is by far THE most thought provoking, the hardest, thus most enjoyable conversation I've ever had a chance to stumble across. I shall rewatch it later.

[@benvoiles9166]

This is one of Jordan's best interviews. The content is fine. But he continues his very generous way of not answering what people ask/want. This is very commendable. It is easy to just give people an answer to their question. But if you are a good teacher/mentor, you will give them the answer that best serves them. The best answer is to refuse to answer a bad question. And he does so with a clear intent that you need to go deeper into these topics and not hope for a simple answer at all. He also knows that many people will use his answers as reasons to dismiss him. He is operating on more levels than almost any mainstream personality that I've seen. Some will go very deep. But they struggle on the surface. JP handles many levels quite well.

[@JesseTate]

So incredible to follow Alex's journey all these years. He continues to evolve and broaden his horizons, to adapt flexibly to the language/worldview of all sorts. He can speak with Dillahunty, Peterson, Kisin, Harris, Dawkins, Pageau, and so many more and he never misses a beat. He always finds the overlap, adapts his langauge game, and delves for the heart of the conversation. I've been waiting for this for a long time. Tough to say who I align with more. I feel that I naturally tend to use more narrative, religious language when I discuss life; but when it comes down to it I would always say I agree with Alex more--or at least I resonate with his past criticisms of Peterson's flakiness/question-dodging. But then I understand how Peterson simply sees things differently. He doesn't see religion as most people do. He doesn't see God as most people do. I thoroughly resonate with his critics when they confront him for not acknowledging this; but I also thoroughly resonate with him when he grows frustrated with their inability to engage with the narrative/phenomenological side of life, or even his argument from evolutionary biology. Anyway thank you both! Incredible. Tragic that I have a meeting in five minutes

[@james-fn3fn]

How did your meeting go

[@TrunksG-or4s]

​@@connorkillmice it's okay to disagree with him bro...not a big deal

[@pgrothschild]

​@@TrunksG-or4s It's not about disagreeing with him. JP is the king dodger, fact.

[@TrunksG-or4s]

@@pgrothschild hey man that's also fine, I hope you enjoyed the conversation and God bless you my friend.

[@coledriescher9401]

@@james-fn3fn hopefully it went well...

[@ReadingRambo152]

"I'm not sure you even know what club you're in" 😂 As an atheist/skeptic I'm thoroughly enjoying this conversation. Peterson and O'Connor bring out the best in each other.

[@thegrunbeld6876]

well, what do you mean by the "best"? What do you mean you "enjoy" a conversion as profound such as this? You surely operate on a metaphysical substrate that are fundamentally unskeptical. Whatever the hell that means!!!!!

[@Andre_Louis_Moreau]

That was one of the best lines! As an atheist/skeptic that was studying authoritarian thought reform tactics when "atheism plus" infected the community... I've been saying atheism is an unacknowledged denomination of Protestantism. I argue atheism has their club and purity test members, same as any Christian denomination purity tests all the others.

[@CazznPower]

I think that by half of their conversation Alex really gets Peterson out of his identity-politics obsession. Which is remarkable.

[@ReadingRambo152]

@@CazznPower Couldn't agree more!

[@Jmoss7]

It really was awesome. After seeing the past clips on Alex’s channel sort of disparaging JP, I thought this would be more of a “gotcha” debate, but it was the farthest thing from that, as far as I can tell. I have a lot more respect for Alex because of that.

[@sarahcunniffe4678]

I work with people who have communication difficulties, Alex was doing what i aim to do in order to get any specific person's view communicated effectively. It isn't easy, and it takes a considerably amount of energy. I think Alex is one of the few who created an environment where JP didn't have to fear miscommunication.

[@ALLAHDRINKSCUM]

Peterson is a hack sophist.

[@lordleon1337]

Same amount of depth in thought just from two different perspectives. A true joint adventure of two mutually interested Intellectuals battling the titans of the universes deepest questions and mysteries. This is how we all get more understanding! Magnificent!

[@gooser2583]

Its refreshing to listen to JP discuss religion with someone who isn't intent on recruiting him to their 'team'. Props to Alex, well done. - A Christian

[@steveisham8624]

Yes!

[@edurodriguesigues]

Didn't you watch the video???? Peterson said and Alex confirmed his intentions to prove his point about Jordan, that he didn't believe in God. And he failed miserable in 22:00 When Jordan clearly and loud said: I believe in the resurrection of Jesus. End.

[@andrewofaiur]

No words can fully capture the anticipation behind this conversation. Here's hoping that this is the first of many conversations between these two.

[@tomol012]

A wonderfully engaging conversation. Those talks where Dr Peterson is challenged on his positions are the best. They really go so much deeper.

[@rizwanzaman1793]

Really glad this conversation happened. Thanks both of you!

[@TheReaper9456]

This might be the most enlightening conversation I've ever seen Dr. Peterson ever participate in. I've never seen him get so down in the details in this way and so much of what he has said in the past finally fell into place and made sense.

[@dorobo81]

:D

[@Rave.-]

Alex's tangent about Genesis was fascinating to me. I am someone who has never held *any* interest in the contents of the Bible, and yet I had a smile ear to ear listening to this deconstruction. Usually when Alex is quoting the Bible in his discussions, they feel like citations and footnotes, and this one just felt completely different. An actual scholarly fascination with the possible interpretations. And let me be frank... I'm not a Peterson fan. But these two bouncing ideas off of each other so freely might be the most enjoyable conversation I've listened to in years.

[@IFeelQuiteHungry]

Reading the "Apocryphon of John" tends to make Genesis much more interesting, and that is what Alex has been doing lately.

[@sercastamere9853]

No one assumed you were, this entire comments section are here from their atheistic algorithm or from O'Connor's page. Like any parasitic ideology the fans travel in packs...

[@tadeastopolcany4976]

😊😊😊ii ok u😮😅😅😮😮😮😅😮 o nás vyžaduje 😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😢

[@nickcoker4293]

Why are you not a Peterson fan? Just wondering. :)

[@SolDizZo]

Then you are now a fan. It doesn't mean you have to agree with everything he says, just that you'd probably feel some admiration in his presence.

[@notgodzod]

What an excellent discussion. Thank you both for a truly exemplary conversation between two people genuinely trying to understand each other and themselves.

[@DanielFriendMusic]

Very impressed by the way Alex conducts himself in debate and conversation.