Sam Harris vs Jordan Peterson on religion and the meaning of life | Cal Newport and Lex Fridman

Lex Fridman Podcast full episode: • Cal Newport: Deep Work...
Please support this podcast by checking out our sponsors:
ExpressVPN: expressvpn.com... and use code LexPod to get 3 months free
Linode: linode.com/lex to get $100 free credit
Sun Basket: sunbasket.com/lex and use code LEX to get $35 off
SimpliSafe: simplisafe.com... and use code LEX to get a free security camera
GUEST BIO:
Cal Newport is a computer scientist who also writes about productivity.
PODCAST INFO:
Podcast website: lexfridman.com...
Apple Podcasts: apple.co/2lwqZIr
Spotify: spoti.fi/2nEwCF8
RSS: lexfridman.com...
Full episodes playlist: • Lex Fridman Podcast
Clips playlist: • Lex Fridman Podcast Clips
SOCIAL:
Twitter: / lexfridman
LinkedIn: / lexfridman
Facebook: / lexfridmanpage
Instagram: / lexfridman
Medium: / lexfridman
Reddit: / lexfridman
Support on Patreon: / lexfridman

[@LockeLeon]

5:20 When you talk about Jordan eventually a 'roughly speaking' is going to come out.

[@andreas0101]

@Ray Kamden We can watch your mom on netflix

[@lnc-to4ku]

Also, I'd SO love to see Lex have a discussion with Jordan.... wow, two very deep, measured thinkers discussing the heavy topics of life!!

[@spacebaged]

How this still hasn't happened is beyond me.

[@thepopdog1973]

He was a guest a couple months back, look at past episodes

[@chaosss444]

we officially have our word of the year..."Petersonian"

[@zachmorgan6982]

Love it

[@lnc-to4ku]

I can't wait for my day's work to be done when I can listen to this whole podcast! Love Cal's little nod for Jordan Peterson's philosophy....at least what I think I picked up on in this short video.

[@Yellow-Rose]

"There was a boy, a very strange enchanted boy. They say he wondered very far, very far, over land and sea. A little shy and sad of eye, but very wise was he. And then one day, one magic day, he passed my way. And as we spoke of many things, fools and kings, this he said to me- "The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return"

[@dimopapad874]

Talk with JP

[@jltdrum]

Not really to be the devil's advocate here but I would expect a person like Carl Newport to be a bit more cohesive and systematic in his arguments - precisely because that's his forte: focused attention, commitment to the logical framework of the topic at hand. I tend to believe Sam Harris is the person to emulate here - his words are measured, his style authentic, the focused attention paid on every syllable uttered hugely respectable.

[@dogfriendlynz9462]

Sounds as if someone asked "what does jordan peterson say but explain like I'm a teenager"

[@tobycokes1]

Peterson confuses himself

[@tobycokes1]

@@cristianproust We all confuse ourselves Jordan does it in the public eye

[@tobycokes1]

@@cristianproust Why do you think I'm the only one noticing? I think Petersons version of truth confused the fuck out a number of the smarts you mentioned

[@tobycokes1]

@@cristianproust you are projecting unfairly and using mutiple ad hominen fallacious protests. If you wish to listen to Jordan's first podcast with Sam Harris I can simply rest my case here and now.

[@tobycokes1]

@@cristianproustad hominen is attacking the person not the argument which you clearly did by saying I couldn't understand 90% of what was said. I'm not up for debate or interested in starting one. I understand your first language is not English but I'm finding it difficult to parse your sentences and its tiring. If you believe I have a moral imperative to explain my one glib comment left on a KZbin comments section then so be it. Have a nice day, I don't wish to get embroiled as it will not serve to change either of our opinions. You win 🏆

[@ciprh1]

Lex, I understand this title gets more views but I think it's misleading. Those two are barely mentioned while Karen Armstrong is much more often named. A better and more correct title I think would be something like "Religion as a sui generis OS for life". I sent this clip to somebody for this exact idea and he dismissed it by default just because he could care less about Peterson, yet I think he would've been interested. I had to do the extra work of explaining to him that the clip is not about Peterson at all (or Sam Harris for that matter). Don't let the youtuber mindset get in the way of conceptual clarity. As an engineer I'm sure you understand why that's not right.

[@laertesindeed]

Armstrong has a worse reputation among people who care about knowledge than either Harris or Peterson, do, though.....

[@ciprh1]

@@laertesindeed Yup, that's why I didn't mention her in my suggestion. The premise is still somewhat intriguing as a concept to justify a discussion.

[@DoubleI662]

Cal is one of the most down to earth guys on the tube.

[@zacharychristy8928]

This actually crystalizes my main problem with Peterson very well. If religion is the Rutherford model of the atom, a practical model for making predictions, then Peterson's tendency is to place the Rutherford model above any modern Quantum mechanical model, because the Rutherford model has been useful for a long period of time. Additionally, his equivalent argument would be that even if you know the Rutherford model is incomplete, you still believe it's a higher truth than the quantum model if you simply act as though the Rutherford model were complete, and that's obviously not true.

[@johnnytass2111]

If the Rutherford model stands for Religion, what does the Quantum model stand for?

[@zacharychristy8928]

​@@johnnytass2111 I'd say it's anything that we, at one point, didn't have the tools to understand empirically, and instead explained with religious beliefs. Like psychology, health, astronomy, natural disasters, for example. Once we obtained a better working knowledge of the world, we didn't need to rely on the old model, even if it could have been practical in some situations. Peterson seems to be implying that even though I know lightning isn't the literal wrath of Zeus, the fact that I behave as though it were is somehow a higher truth, 'meta-true' as he calls it.

[@johnnytass2111]

@@zacharychristy8928 Thank you. I was asking because many people project their theories or ideas onto the Quantum Realm since it's that realm that is still so mysterious to us.

[@RokuSquad]

I believe that your characterization of his framework is slightly erroneous. You cannot just use the concept of time when referring to your analogy with the Rutherford model trying to explain Peterson. There are many more factors to implement if you want to characterize the problem that way. From what I understand, Peterson may be using one model because it’s the most pragmatic one, while correctly adjusting to the other model when it comes to theory or needing biological meaning over the biblical and religious texts.

[@zacharychristy8928]

@@RokuSquad the concept of time IS relevant, because Peterson himself cites it as a reason why religion is a higher truth. Because it's been useful for a longer period of time. Your second argument supports what Im saying though. If you have a model that you use for the world that you have adjust, caveat, and modify frequently, then it's not a "higher truth" it's basically just a moral heuristic, which basically anyone living in a functional society has in some form. It makes religion smaller and less important, not the other way around.

[@rahult500]

He mentioned Karen Armstrong more than the other two. How did the title become SH vs JP?...

[@MrFlameRad]

I see you're still learning about how youtubers are forced to play to the algorithm. JP and SH are much more clickbaity names

[@thomasmurray5108]

"...to experience the fuller extremities of existence, and dare we say 'spirituality' or consciousness, in a manner that our overcivilized minds are incapable of experiencing now..."

[@iv7796]

Insert Joe Rogan voice: Have you ever heard of DMT 😄👁👍

[@nupurnishant4197]

Cal Newport is one of my absolute favourite authors. I really respect how down to earth and no-bullshit he is.

[@demondeacon5175]

Meaning: Love God. Love others. Love self.

[@chrisgadsby5700]

This type of question crops up regularly with Lex. I find it curious that he hopes to find deeper meaning via something we create (AI) rather than in our "roots" etc. Even the Sam Harris types need a substitute, because it seems to be a perennial question for mankind. I'm not religious, much older than these guys and Darwin is one of my heroes. However I couldn't ignore that some religious type concept emerged in every culture, in every part of the world. Due to JP and others I've become more open to the symbolic wisdom idea, rather than literal meaning.

[@laertesindeed]

I don't quite understand your attempted syllogism. Many different human cultures had some false idea emerge....so you are required to pick a false idea and promote it as true? One culture said it is magically forbidden to eat beef, a different one said it is magically forbidden to eat pork, yet another culture said it is magically forbidden to eat birds....almost every human culture that emerged in the iron age came up with some magical ban on eating something that is objectively healthy and safe and nutritious for the human organism to eat. But why would you conclude that magical bans on eating healthy food should be promoted...? Why doesn't it seem obvious to you, as it does to hundreds of millions of us, that this just demonstrates humans can make silly mistakes and then treat them like magical laws because of social peer pressure? Moreover, the magical bans contradict each other....because humans in cultures outside the one that bans eating of beef know that beef can be perfectly healthy and nutritious and beneficial. Humans outside the culture that bans eating of birds know that birds can be perfectly healthy and nutritious and beneficial. Humans outside the culture that bans eating of pork know that pork can be perfectly healthy and nutritious and beneficial. Likewise, the religions of the different human cultures also contradict each other.... so from any logical perspective; you should never promote or accept or pursue the claim that one of them got it right..... let alone to make up your own faith based unsupported non-denominational religion to perform "fake it till it makes you feel good" on. The more logical conclusion is that all the religions are wrong, and the process of science (I don't mean the corporations or associations or social-political cabals) is a better way to continually seek the truth and eliminate falsehoods as we develop our lives and the lives of our children, and their children.

[@jltdrum]

I'm startled to realize that Ken Wilber is not at all there in the picture in any of such dialogues these days. Doubtlessly his was the sole formulation that ever successfully reconciled both worlds and came closest to reality as possible.

[@BlueBellGoPro]

Who ever is generally and holistically content in all the spectrums of their life’s positive and negative know the meaning of life and the others are searching for direction. I am extremely stubborn at being myself and the idea of my life changing unsettles me as I like my life as it is.

[@xolanindlovu6158]

Let's have David Berlinski on, Lex.

[@annoninson]

Currently going through a period of live how you know is best, but make allowance for doubting too

[@StephenIC]

The thing is I think the Harris/Dawkins/Hitchens criticism of religion was necessary. Most people dont think about religion in such a sophisticated way as Jordan, they think they know who and what God is and that "he" dictated whats in the bible and "he" wants this and doesn't want that. I've been an atheist for years because this literal interpretation is what I faced growing up and it seems completely and obviously wrong. Peterson is the guy who has made me interested in religion, because the way he speaks, he doesn't believe in the book literally but that its the deepest and most important metaphor we have. I do think if religion is going to survive it will be through the "Petersonian Ian" lens. (I know JBP didn't invent this way of thinking but he's made it mainstream)

[@franciscopisbo]

You should find a scholar on René Girard’s theory. It might blow your mind.

[@notna4894]

I never understood why we need religion when we have philosophy. Why would you want to restrict your thinking with some preconceived notions, while philosphy allows you to go anywhere in search of meaning.

[@josiahz21]

@Bobby Rubarb close to 50% of Americans identify as Christian in some form or another. Far from dead but the numbers are dropping. I agree with the op that philosophy is the proper replacement for religion. It is just my opinion, that religious people gave up on philosophy and outsourced their beliefs to said religion. You can take core beliefs from many religions and sift them through philosophy and many good ideas survive the test. Golden rule being one of them. It was a good idea before religion and it will be a good idea long after it’s gone.

[@stefc7122]

I agree. It seems to me that the meaning of life is to simply live. Since philosophy allows us to use logic, reasoning and math we can approach life in a way such that our emotions don’t interfere and we can discuss existential issues rationally. To me, the value that religions have are the routines and rituals to help us with the self discipline that’s needed to persevere and philosophy doesn’t prevent us from embracing those rituals and traditions. On the other hand, many religions try to prevent us from using logic and reasoning when it comes to the natural world. Many religions also ignore risk / reward scenarios that are lead to the destruction of all life on earth. It doesn’t make sense. I don’t follow Daniel Schmachtenberger but in the few times I’ve listened to him, he seems to have a great understanding of so many existential issues. Bret Weinstein’s recent interview with him was excellent. Has Lex had Daniel on his podcast yet?

[@josiahz21]

@Bobby Rubarb you give up too easily my friend. Philosophy can fill that void religion leaves when one leaves it. Our constitution for instance is exactly that. Man made laws, derived from rigorous debate, that are upheld to the best of our ability. Did religion influence it, in some ways sure, but it stands without it just fine and could have been created without it as well. There is no morale in any religious text that philosophy cannot tackle and make better. Consider the veil of ignorance. Also known as the golden rule, do unto others, etc. I don’t want to burn any books, and I have religious family whom I love. If we are going to pull texts from the past and use it as a rule of thumb my choice would be Socrates. There is plenty of meaningful things without a god or religion. Love is a thing that exists independently as well.

[@bmead2058]

Your ideas are so undercooked that I doubt you've actually read much philosophy. I hope you read more before you go about touting these ideas in front of people who have. On the internet you can be jeered in a better direction. In life, you'll just embarrass them.

[@notna4894]

@@bmead2058 Although I have read quite a lot, I agree I should read more and educate myself further. Also, can´t argue about my ideas being advanced or interesting, there are plenty people around who are much smarter than I.

[@rudivandoornegat2371]

I'd love if Lex would talk with at least one of the intellectual light web about meaning Jonathan Pageau, John Vervaeke or Paul vander Klay (all of them have a KZbin channel).

[@vincentstuart8664]

It's so strange, I love both Harris and Peterson, I just pick certain things from both of them to listen to

[@blakerupert]

what's the audio hiss in the background? radio interference?

[@Ccm2019]

Basic Religion Principles are still intact works perfectly fine. Because that OS was built to endure any harsh moments in life and learn how to overcome it.. now since rich countries started to minimize all the hardships.. we don’t appreciate that much OS anymore.

[@benjones621]

Religion has created and bound societies together. Ones that unite and don't divide.

[@christophercousins184]

I'm just amazed at the capacity for us all to talk past each other. I have disagreements with Sam Harris, but at least don't "straw man" his critique of religion. Here, Mr. Newport cites the work of Armstrong and other sophisticated theologians but Harris (as does Dawkins and did Hitchens) is addressing religious fundamentalism. Liberal post-Enlightenment theists are not a threat to society (according to these guys) and are, therefore, not the target of Harris' criticism. My problem with Peterson is that he is a completely different person with someone like Ben Shapiro than when he's talking to someone more "mainstream." I agree, he certainly doesn't want to be pinned down and sometimes I suspect that is because he wants to be everything to everyone... I don't mean that in a callous way, just that he seems to want to please.

[@christophercousins184]

@Despize Perform I don't like to make these kinds of assertions as I'm not a psychiatrist, etc., bit I am concerned about his mental health. I've never really liked Peterson but I don't want him to suffer either. He seems almost disoriented sometimes and then goes off on crazy diatribes like, "young women are to stupid to decide whether they should have children or not." A statement problematic on its own but then watching his anger while he makes these bizarre claims makes them that much more concerning. I know his wife has had serious health problems, too. I certainly wish them both good health and well being despite my disagreements with Prof. Peterson's POV. Best to you...

[@abraham802]

to me religion is poetry and its beautiful in its own way

[@ntme9]

Shouldn't you first be able to define a god before you start believing one exists? What is the criteria for god? What boxes do you check? How do you determine the difference between a god and a highly technologically advanced intelligence?

[@majorkee3001]

God IS Love and Light. Love and Light are the most powerful, life giving forces in the known universe. Love is the only force capable of making a man sacrifice his physical life and body. Pride may get a soldier to battle, but pride wont make him jump on a grenade to save his comrades. Thats Love

[@ntme9]

@@majorkee3001 Is that love or is that one of a complex list of pre programmed behaviors we have developed that has resulted in the survival of our species up to this point?

[@ifeanyiforchu4403]

@@ntme9 I don't think you have to define a thing before you believe in it. And I think there is good reason for this. First,by the nature of things I think it should be impossible to describe or define God if he exists. This is because humans can only describe things in relation to human attributes.....i.e anything we describe,we inadvertently ascribe human attributes to it........ And there is every reason to believe that if God exists,he won't be human or at least limited to human characteristics. Scientists too believe in things they can't describe, albeit in a different way to those who believe in God............ fundamental to scientific inquiry is a faith in the organised and patterned Universe .......a faith without evidence.....but one that is confirmed by the daily works and discovery of scientists..............I think many people who believe in God have a similar framework

[@ntme9]

@@ifeanyiforchu4403 Thinking that If a god exists that it Should be impossible to describe, that's seems a bit too convenient to me. Convenient for the believer.

[@majorkee3001]

@@ntme9 you can give it whatever name you want but a man who doesnt Love his family wont die for them, and a man who doesnt Love his country wont die for it either. Whatever name you give that force that drives a man to sacrifice his own body, that is God

[@BarbaPamino]

Live as if even though you don't really believe? Then he goes on to assert that that don't really believe because they act out against anyway. But he ignores the concept of passion temptation and vice. You act out evil because you get overwhelmed by the sensation that triggers the action. You can absolutely believe something to be wrong and absolutely know youl be punished for it and still act it out. It's not a false belief necessarily.

[@glencecil293]

Want he means is live by the values even though you don't really understand..... Faith.

[@BarbaPamino]

@@glencecil293 and I'm talking about those that do understand and still falter.

[@glencecil293]

@@BarbaPamino I would say your actions prove what you truly believe. A sinner believes he can't stop sinning. But is that really true? Jesus devoted his life to save people from their sins.

[@DWAGON1818]

Facts don't have to make sense. If God has created life like a particular way then there is no way to escape it. Does it make sense that we are made of tiny particles or maybe strings of energy? Karen Armstrong is wrong about Islam. There is an plethora of literature in which the wisdom about this life and creation is being discussed.

[@ljohnson7124]

Peterson (and Jung) would agree that we intimate our way to religion, and now we can look at global correlates

[@tima5033]

To compare religion to the Rutherford model is laughable. Rutherford model can make some accurate predictions.

[@alaricgoldkuhl155]

Typical knee-jerk scientism reaction dude. I think it's laughable because religion actually makes a significant difference to the quality of a person's life. Knowing the Rutherford Model does not because an IS cannot make an OUGHT. Science cannot motivate us to do anything. Religion can.

[@EnlightenedTurtle]

"we can't comprehend what's going on"... Some of us can.

[@tobycokes1]

Can you ?

[@alaricgoldkuhl155]

@@tobycokes1 Dude, did you just ask an Enlightened Turtle can he comprehend what's going on? Never been this far down the rabbit hole before... [gets popcorn] Also, ask him if he's ever seen a smile without a cat.

[@tobycokes1]

@@alaricgoldkuhl155 over to you

[@alaricgoldkuhl155]

@@tobycokes1 I wanna hear from the Turtle man! But if you are asking, I think asking "what is the meaning of life?" is as stupid a question as "what is the color of C++?" Story and meaning are the AI language of the human brain. They are what lets us know how we are doing in the simulation - they inform our limbic systems and determine our emotional responses. Religion provides a map of meaning we may choose to take up (or not). Science however is utterly bankrupt in this department. Looking for meaning out in the universe? You will never find it. Only exists in brains.

[@tobycokes1]

@@alaricgoldkuhl155 a complete lack of meaning is meaning in of itself

[@darlenemontano4608]

Let’s practice a more sophisticated religion by using our intellectual skills on caring for this beautiful planet.

[@freedom_aint_free]

Lex should bring Stefan Molyneux on this show he would really shine.

[@PetriLittlefoot]

Bring Sam on!!

[@JamesBond-uz2dm]

I use Pascal's Wager. If I believe, and it is not true, I do not lose much. If I do not believe, and it is true, I lose everything. So I am betting it is true.

[@williambartholmey5946]

Pascal's wager is nonsense. If God is omniscient, he would know the difference between genuine belief and this 'wagered' belief, and the wagerers would be off to hell anyway.

[@Yoko4797]

@@williambartholmey5946 You make no sense - if God exists, he should be able to see the "why" of your beliefs not just the surface stuff. If you have wagered beliefs, he should be able to understand the thought process you went through to arrive at that and empathize

[@Fangface74]

@@Yoko4797 you make no sense, if you bet an equal amount of chips onto every possible outcome, that is not devotion, and any god that would accept hedging your love is a pretty weak entity.

[@antropatico]

check Jonathan Pageau's work.

[@gnomishviking3013]

He’s just uses “faith and worship” as a catch all explanation which neither explains or proves anything. Then he falls into the same trap Peterson lays out by romanticizing the bible. Specifically Old Testament with the “moral value” of these stories while ignoring all the horrific things in it which people did in the name of god and what god has all done himself.

[@oriantalist]

I am a simple guy. I see Cal Newport, I click.

[@oriantalist]

@@cristianproust you've mentioned quite an alluring topic. I'll have to conduct research of my own and get back to you on it 😉

[@josefeidering4212]

I agree with Jordan Petersson in that there are good implications for yourself and people around you(at least functionally) to take responsibility for yourself, get your shit together etc. However as Lex says, it's only principles, Jordan seems to have the view that there are something more to the principles just principles(hence why he doesn't want to answer whether he's christian or not). There are some many things in life that totally crushes this notion, take hiroshima/nagasaki out of many tragic events, say you were a guy/gal living in those cities, you lived your live stringently to noble principles, had everything going for you, one day out of nowhere *bam* and you are gone and there is no more to it. Now this sort of random tragedy happens on micro scale all the time, genes gets activated/deactivated, you happen to be at the wrong place at the wrong time, etc, etc. Fundamentally things just is, regardless of how you live your life.

[@jmcm152]

I'm 27 😱

[@stephannaro2113]

What is the point you're trying to express so vaguely? "Behave X because wrath of gods"? Please list your Xs so I know what you're talking about. And why do I have the idea that you've left out an important term? Shouldn't it be "Behave P because Q (which is assumed to be the consequence of the wrath of gods)"? Hiding that term is the move of an authoritarian, who can now control your life to the extent that you fear the unpredictable wrath of the gods.

[@seesnap]

Haven’t a clue what there harping on about. I’m gonna watch cartoons instead

[@betelrock5355]

this is an enlightenment thing referring to requiring evidence for belief is mind-blowing, if belief is virtuous by nature of not needing evidence I have a life-changing cult i think you should hear about

[@jayscore7182]

If you ain't first you're last

[@brantswanson3763]

Damn. I wish I had a prescription of adderall

[@jacobhartwell8211]

@@yvonjasser many times it comes without the ADHD

[@Primusaur]

I really enjoyed hearing this insight into religion.

[@laertesindeed]

He's basically defining religion as "fake it till you make yourself feel good"

[@joshcastro739]

i understood none of what he said

[@betelrock5355]

replace post enlightenment with the ability to question the church without repercussions of death and this argument looks as stupid as is it in reality

[@k.butler8740]

İmagine you're in Omelas and have suspicions as to it's foundations, but don't know for sure. What harm would you wrought on others happiness and Omelas's cohesion and productivity if you start publicly questioning those foundations? İt's not that slippery of a slope for a leader to go down to consider that if they allow you to continue you may throw society out of synchrony to the point that people starve. İn any event, it was a risk pre enlightenment leaders weren't willing to take.

[@betelrock5355]

@@k.butler8740 in this analogy, what would be the real world society you are comparing the Utopia mentioned?

[@k.butler8740]

@@betelrock5355 every one, tbh. Omelas isn't a utopia as much as a society built upon unethical foundations that has happy citizenry. İf you shine light on those foundations you risk throwing babies out with bath water, or at least marring the happiness of the citizens

[@betelrock5355]

@@k.butler8740 that argument would hold more weight of I wasnt specificity referencing the Catholic Church killing it's own people for expressing thoughts contrary to doctrine. I don't think we should throw the baby out with the bathwater, but if that water is killing the baby i believe we should try and get the water that is killing it out of it's lungs, and in my opinion when you can't express thoughts for fear of the death penalty I think it's amoral to support that system, and I will use a quote directly from the good book if that would help, Matthew 5:29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. So if a society is killing it's residents for expressing ideas, why wouldn't would want a better society, and does the happiness/contentment of some justify the deaths of others?

[@k.butler8740]

@@betelrock5355 "definitely sacrifice the one to probably save the many?" İs a pretty old paradox... You can have heroes on both sides: this tension has yielded a lotta great fiction. İn any event, this paradox can be recast through the considerations of value and goodness, which yields the consideration of "a house is burning and you can save the child or a Rembrandt masterpiece. Which do you choose?" Pre enlightenment is pretty analogous with concern with meaning over form (when you "behold a hundred thousand rose gardens behind that clay", as Rumi put it yes, you neglect the clay) but with the granting of the ineffable you're more inclined to adopt collectivist group identities which yields more easily the seeing of a problem person as an offensive right eye to be cast out. I'm not sure i addressed your question but here are my thoughts, i tried to stay relevant, and I'm interested in yours.

[@nickpmusic]

This guy quotes so many names, it’s hard to keep up.

[@rajanghimire6162]

the new home is the gateway process

[@safekidda46]

How can he be a computer scientist/AI developer and not know 42. Literally everyone uses it as random seed 😅

[@joshuaswick]

No... time.Now().

[@sherrylennondewitt7557]

♾

[@iv7796]

👁

[@kayfalls5807]

Crap, I'll never get this time back

[@UserName-ii1ce]

Good thing you don't have to listen to it lol

[@brendonferguson5726]

The Sam Harris - Jordan Peterson podcast was tough to listen to. I think Peterson broke down. Wonder what Lex and Cam thought about it. I think Sam gets a lot of flak for saying things that aren't that bad, personally. And often backed up by evidence or strong reasoning. Which, to be fair, probably applies to Peterson as well.

[@kevinfoster2163]

27 IS A BETTER NUMBER

[@gustavovillatoro7970]

The statements made here in this video show how low the understanding of religion.. You think God wants you to get a perfect score? Religious ppl yes Christianity? No. God doesn’t want you to “be good” he is asking that you have a thankful heart for all the creation he gave us. He wants you to experience life in its deepest essence. Love relations food sex and so forth. All in its healthy order and according to his wisdom so we don’t hurt each other. It’s common sense if you just think a bit about it.

[@thomasmurray5108]

Sam Harris and Steven Pinker continually make unsubstantiated claims regarding the the lives and existence of primitive peoples, whose cultures they deem bereft of a higher quality of life simply because they are beset, perpetually, by famine and hardship. But any studied position of this argument should maintain the opposite viewpoint: Theses cultures are in fact healthier and happier, precisely because their unique position of suffering has conditioned them to experience the fullest extremities of existence in a manner that is literally unfathomable to the increasingly ambivalent, civilized mind.

[@MarviRafaelMontecillo]

+ 10

[@Sergeant_Camacho]

Exactly. I was reading Robert A. Heinlein's Starship Troopers sci-fi novel, and he makes that basic argument: "when an individual fights for something and achieve a goal by effort, sacrifice and suffering, he will be much happier than anyone who has been receiving everything in his life without effort."

[@Sergeant_Camacho]

@@SonOfThineHandmaid I don't know what you mean of "religious poetry" about that quote from Heinlein novel, but the evidence and facts are how humans evolved because of suffering, sacrifice and achievement. Hard to understand nowadays, but hunting was a huge dopamine rush for a caveman and a great motivator for the first paleolithic tribes.

[@anab0lic]

@@SonOfThineHandmaid can't say i agree that we are healthier than ever before. We may live longer, but much of the average persons life is plagued by all sorts of health ailments, many of which were no where near as prevalent as they were in the past. Poisoning the population with foods that we did not evolve to thrive on has much to do with this.

[@anab0lic]

@@SonOfThineHandmaid yes i am well aware that medical advancements have helped improve infant mortality. ( its one of the main reasons life expectancy numbers are higher.) I'm also aware of just how much harm our current medical systems do in other ways. Too much focus on trying to fix or minimize the symptoms of sick people, rather than prevention of people getting sick in the first place, because the later is not profitable. Medical industry thrives on exploiting the unwell. You would have to be pretty ignorant to think we live in a healthy society... the average person is profoundly sick, both physically and mentally and as a result performing way below his/her potential.

[@sethwoodward7181]

That was a pretty unimpressive response.

[@GX901]

Thank God we have a King. Isaiah 9:6. If it wasn't for Sam Harris I would have never found God. Thank you, Sam and God Bless. The truth should never be hidden. Justus Sustermans 1636. John 16:13, John 6:63.Revelation 13:18. Long Live Christ the King. 32.6996° N, 35.3035° E

[@kamilpawlowski6576]

Eventually when all this plays out these ‘new gods’ will have to look like the old gods so that they can survive all the tragedies that nature inflicts on humans and those that humans inflict on each other. People think that the ceremonies, the worship, the dogma etc are useless. They are wrong. These things allow the idea in the religion to regrow from almost total destruction. There is no encoding of a bios that we’ve even close to conceiving that is on that scale.

[@iv7796]

give it time... Im sure our creator had similar challanges 😄✌

[@JS44444]

If we’re comparing OS to religion then our currently held religion, with a couple exceptions, is an outdated one that hasn’t seen an update in centuries. It’s time for an update.

[@Arjun-eb1yc]

Actually religious practices of all the major religions have evolved and continue to evolve over thousands of years. What you may be referring to is the source texts which seem to have barely evolved in the last 1700-2000 years, yes that presents a problem particularly when you are dogmatic about it. Although the actual practice of the religions, which areas are focused on, and the intellectual landscape around it and supplemental material continues to evolve.

[@ifeanyiforchu4403]

What if religion has been updated at the level of source text to suit this modern era with all its complexities. What if like previous great religions of the past it is still taking its roots outside popular and mainstream academic and media circles.

[@josiahz21]

It’s constantly updated. Or the translation is anyway. 1000s of denominations of Christianity because each new one claims the old one is reading it wrong. Bug fixes that bring more bugs are great.

[@ifeanyiforchu4403]

@@josiahz21 the text of the Bible has remained unchanged for about two thousand years. We have not had an updated religion by an independent Prophet with the recognised authority to alter or update the source text ......

[@josiahz21]

Yes it has. Apocrypha was originally part of the source material. Kjv became the niv. Islam claims Muhammad is one such prophet. Baha’i religion says they’re all valid and make an attempt to add science to their beliefs. New interpretations change the source material as they see fit.

[@rayhan3654]

The question: *what is the meaning of life?* presupposes that there has to be an external, mind-independant, unassailable fact about the universe that answers it. Religious folk ground meaning in the faith of God, but of course God's are infinitely irrefutable and all make the same claims so that doesn't take you far. Meaning cannot be something that is one size for all; we must accept that the universe is indifferent to our struggles and successes. In this sense, it is a liberating truth about us. We all make our own meanings; we are the part of the universe that has become conscious and can create meaning from otherwise meaningless matter.

[@ifeanyiforchu4403]

Seems defeatist to me, resigning to the assumption that there is no meaning to life. If all human beings can have universal similarities in physiology and anatomy,why should we doubt that there could be a universal meaning to life........ even though this Universal meaning may be tailored to Individual uniqueness just like universal physiological features appear uniquely in every single Individual

[@ifeanyiforchu4403]

@@SonOfThineHandmaid The case here is to avoid narratives that outrightly rule out the possibility of a Universal meaning just because it is proving elusive or difficult to uncover.................... what ever meaning there is to life, universal or not, it's attainment has to be through physiological endowments,at least in part...........and that this endowment is universal is a pointer to me that we shouldn't be too surprised if there is a Universal component to a meaning of life

[@Yoko4797]

There is no "creating meaning" imo. All we can do for now is distract ourselves with tasks we think are useful and then die. We can only hope that future generations will either use our contributions to figure out if there is any meaning OR just accept the fact that life has no meaning and that we are all better off dead.

[@Yoko4797]

@@SonOfThineHandmaid It has to be through physiological means because thats what we are as humans. Anything else and it becomes irrelevant to us and our suffering through existence.

[@ifeanyiforchu4403]

@@Yoko4797 just like great scientific discoveries, meaning may be discovered not "created" per say..... Intuitively, anywhere I see a pattern I naturally expect a meaning can be derived........it even seems to me patterns are assembled by "meanings".

[@iv7796]

Everything came from the Big Bang, We are all One ongoing Process... Hell and Heaven is here on Earth. God is Us and We make the world into what We want it to be. AI is just another expression of this One/Process continuously improving Itself to infinity.

[@iv7796]

@@cristianproust It's a funny synchronicity that I was just listening to a Podcast of Sam Harris about free will or the lack there of 😅

[@iv7796]

@@cristianproust I often feel each person lives in their own universe. I belive in choice and people who dont often trying to escape consequences of their feelings by stating that the universe is predestined. There is only now, past and future are just simulations of the mind. Expand more on this static block universe your talking about.

[@iv7796]

@@cristianproust The coincidences seem to stack up the older I get, they become more and more a part of life and seem to be a fundamental part of the universe. I started practicing speaking to the one universal consciousness and it seems to respond often with exactly the type of synchronicities that I demand from it almost as if I am manifesting these synchronicities with the help of the universe itself. This could be simply a mechanism of my mind but if anything a very useful one... I call it God

[@iv7796]

@@cristianproust Just remember to enjoy the game a little, don't get too lost in the abstract. 👍 for the "clockwork orange" avatar lol great film! Have you ever seen "they live"? Theres a good documentary made about it called a "perverts guide to ideology" you should check it out. I have a feeling youd enjoy it.

[@furmanodell]

On this topic, Dennis Prager crushes all these guys.

[@robg4472]

Of course it’s not 27 or 42. Neither is prime. Obviously.

[@alaricgoldkuhl155]

While primes are important, 42 is special because it's divisible by 6 of the first 7 numbers, yet has a prime on both sides of it. You also need to consider that the Question of Life, the Universe and everything could be "What is 6 times 7?" Answer that with a prime at your peril.

[@robg4472]

@@alaricgoldkuhl155 could be.

[@alaricgoldkuhl155]

@@robg4472 I really like 26 as a number too. Twice 13, and the only integer that's between a square on one side and a cube on the other. Other than these two though, I totally agree about the prime thing. EVERYTHING seems to depend on them!

[@CSwift-vr1qg]

Damn. It’s 27

[@UserName-ii1ce]

If you're a Peterson fan, for Gods sake be brief and clear when you comment. Don't say nothing in 300 words.

[@And-Or101]

But that’s the Peterson way. 🤷‍♂️

[@amirhosseinahmadi3706]

How can you be a Peterson fan and not make a word salad every time you want to say anything?

[@UserName-ii1ce]

@@amirhosseinahmadi3706 I'm kind of a fan but not everything needs to be romantic

[@seeker11]

Why are exited to have human creations like AI, be the new gods of anything? Ah yes but some humans require a god after all. Something to justify things for them because they themselves can't.

[@MrFocusification]

Transhumanism isn't the route for humanity we'll find this out one way or another when technology surpasses the evolution of spirituality vs the other way around we turn into Darth Vader

[@AtheistJohnMathers]

Why did he mention "27"?

[@CallowMethuselah]

Hitchhiker's Guide (ultimate answer to the universe, life, and everything was supposedly "42")... he simply forgot the number Douglas Adams used in his story

[@AtheistJohnMathers]

@@CallowMethuselah How could he forget it? There isn't a clever hidden meaning to him saying "27"? That's disappointing.

[@josuardalexgonzales9383]

@@AtheistJohnMathers it’s not about the answer, it’s about the question haha

[@simonmasters3295]

It is a common technique. Let someone else remember their truth, and they will empathise

[@jax_pax_channel_podcast]

The 27 Club -- group of artists who died at 27 -- a lot of people have breakdowns at 27 -- like a quarter life crisis

[@ishtar0077]

Religion will just transform like everything else. There's small groups that are mixing religion with science. I look at my 11yrs old niece that is trying to understand god using science. God to her is something else

[@Tuckdragon]

perhaps life is math and the better you are att planning and keeping order, the more you are following your divine calculation.

[@muktastimpfig2890]

42 views...

[@ab_-pk9xe]

True religion is a manual God has sent in order for us to live the optimal way of life.

[@kenzopoe7050]

If you try to make bread without yeast it won't rise. Likewise is true with humans. Humanity is losing it's moral/ethical value systems that were once given by religion. We are now making humans without proper value systems in their code.

[@rickyraycuriousobserver]

👁☮🌌🌌🌌🎶🎶🎶🎶🎶📡

[@AetherXIV]

7:40 AI better not be our new god. jeez man that's a terrible idea. you need to get into more woo. I recommend starting with Remote Viewing. It was used by the US military and proves that consciousness is non-local.

[@jrkim8195]

FIRST!

[@11Nosferatu11]

I used to take Sam Harris seriously. Then he got exposed by Trump like so many other liberals i used to take seriously. If Trump can trigger you, you're not yo be taken seriously.

[@Smokeyone22]

aderall fueled euphorias... Take whatever MEDICATION Jordan takes... You'll find the meaning really quick! lol

[@dariusarmand4511]

First

[@Al-himathy]

Peterson’s aesthetic reading of Christianity will only increase him in despair. Sam Harris is a laughable joke that religious apologists that studied philosophy for 2 years can refute. Sad state of affairs.

[@freethinker79]

Religion is misunderstood psychology/myth.

[@IjzerKeizer]

Its hilarious that people take Jordan Peterson seriously