The Greatest God Debate In History | Jordan Peterson vs Matt Dillahunty

Рет қаралды 1,460,159

9 ай бұрын

Due to thousands of requests, we are uploading this discussion again with enhanced audio.
#jordanpeterson #jordanpetersondaily #jordanpetersonquotes #jordanpetersondebate #jordanpetersonshorts #jordanpetersonmemes #mattdillahunty #atheism #atheist #atheistviews #pangburn #pangburnphilosophy #debate #god
Matt Dillahunty goes head to head with Jordan Peterson on God, Religion, Morality & more!
(No portion of this recording may be reproduced by any means without written permission.)

Пікірлер: 30 000

@Pangburn 4 ай бұрын

If you need a VPN service, we've secured a sweet deal! $ 83% off! piavpn.com/Pangburn Using this VPN service helps support our ability to bring you new content!

@KhaoticDeterminism 4 ай бұрын

what god debate is this? they’re not even gods dude fake news #2Spirit #indigenous #philosophy

@jehovahtruekingdom823 3 ай бұрын

kzbin.info/www/bejne/fZPbeKxjpZ6EkM0

@annemiller8227 3 ай бұрын

😅😂 I'd buy one!

@MichaelAronson 3 ай бұрын

@@GodcodeX77You didn't prove anything. You just wrote random words on KZbin.

@FutureAbe 3 ай бұрын

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

@Rubbafingaz1 4 ай бұрын

For transparency, this debate took place in 2018. Just in case anyone believed this was a recent event.

@aiveenmckeown6728 3 ай бұрын

It is recent it’s only 2 years ag… oh wait 6 years 😭

@sammnyks5467 3 ай бұрын

I also thought it was recent, but a closer look at Dr. Peterson's dressing and hair, I thought otherwise.

@KazbekMairbek 3 ай бұрын

Time doesn't matter since we don't abrogate in whole religion.

@Rubbafingaz1 3 ай бұрын

@@KazbekMairbekTrue, but I believe Peterson's views may have slightly shifted since this talk, hence why context of time may be appropriate.

@griffinturner5046 3 ай бұрын

Only the atheist believes it was recent. Because that’s all you got. No science backs your ignorant bullshit.

@lokdog257 8 ай бұрын

I want a shirt that says "I may be wrong, but I don't think so"

@meganmueller 8 ай бұрын

I feel like it's a weak statement. The better statement would be, "This is the most comprehensive view I hold, but I'm open to finding a more comprehensive view".

@qwertyvypez 8 ай бұрын

@@meganmuellerno lol, that doesn't sound cool. You want a cool statement on your shirt

@trafficjon400 8 ай бұрын

How about a shirt "I may be Right, but I think I'm Left !! lol One thing I might think Right about is the way the average high controller Roller's Use their Vocals if they feel Challenged? They Seem to abruptly, when Slightly challenged improvising a Belching Word that is closest to their topic or View to, over run any understanding? Yet, Seemingly Manipulative and Honesty is somewhere out at port in Religion Debates often enough.

@meganmueller 8 ай бұрын

@@qwertyvypez Peterson’s statement isn’t cool.

@ManamaEd 8 ай бұрын

@@meganmueller Says "megan mueller" like anyone would give a shit about what you consider cool or not

@psychicbyinternet 2 ай бұрын

I love how they both have evil villain chairs.

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 Ай бұрын

All Humans need to repent & Believe in Jesus as their God. Why? Because all Humans have sinned (lied, lusted sexually, stolen, dishonoured parents, unbelief etc). Avoid the fires of Hell (justice of God) and choose Heaven today. Jesus defeated death by rising from the dead. GOD IS HOLY

@baz00katooth 21 күн бұрын

It was almost distracting, every minute or so I couldn’t help but think “Damn, those are some nice chairs”.

@linuxramblingproductions8554 17 күн бұрын

@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363wow for god being a designer he sure does love making his designs evil

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 15 күн бұрын

@@baz00katooth People underestimate hell, it is bad because it is separation from God. In a vision I was shown a person who claimed to be Christian but started fornication (premarital sex), He died relatively young and went to hell forever (1 Cor 6:9). God’s holiness means He will not coexist with sinners forever therefore Repent (Luke 13:3) and have a relationship with Jesus.

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 15 күн бұрын

@@linuxramblingproductions8554 WHY DOESN’T GOD STOP EVIL ? Suppose God were to get involved every time something bad were to happen. God can prevent fatal car accidents, child molestation, grape, murder etc This sounds good on the surface but lets dig in a little deeper. God is the epitome of holiness so He would prevent you from fornicating (premarital sex), lusting (watching pornography), swearing or taking His Holy Name in vain (so God would control your speech) , even eating certain foods or drinks (because God considers it to be junk food and it is destroying your health), hating someone ( so God would control your thoughts). You have essentially been reduced to a robot (following instructions only). But the reality is, you were created as a free creature with the ability to choose right from wrong (freewill), the ability to stop doing sin (Repentance) and to Believe in Jesus (Faith).

@gooadam 3 ай бұрын

On the subject of psychedelic drugs, my experience has been that those who have a worldview that's fear-based are much more likely to have negative effects from psychoactive or hallucinogenic drugs. I've known many former Catholics and a few I've done mushrooms and LSD with in college. Former Catholics had a much more positive outlook on life rather than the fear of eternal torture at the whim of a single being (the devil). I've also seen very negative effects with someone who did have that fear in their worldview which caused them to have a violent reaction to people around them once the ego was separated from their conscious mind. I've never experienced anything "supernatural" as I was always aware that I was on a drug at the time. In fact, I increased my tobacco habit during that period and during psychedelic trips because the glow of the burning tobacco was amazing to watch.

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 Ай бұрын

@daves7775 7 ай бұрын

Thank you for posting this - without a bunch of interrupting commentary; or inserting dumb images and or music. Just the discussion. Thank you.

@vlogshd2081 7 ай бұрын

No one does that

@donttrustthem7601 7 ай бұрын

quik and simple god is your jewish pagan god Yahwe(יהוה). why? The nation of Israel believes in a fake god (Yahweh - יהוה) who is at rest. If your fake god is at rest, who then controls the Universe and all creation?... To control all creation, the True God is needed. It turns out that if your fake god (Yahweh - יהוה) is resting, then he is replaced by another of the same fake god, and he is also resting... And so on ad infinitum, this is repeated. It turns out that in fact the Jewish fake god (Yahweh - יהוה) does not exist.

@WhoThisMonkey 7 ай бұрын

@@vlogshd2081 In your experience

@daves7775 7 ай бұрын

@@vlogshd2081 Really? What rock do you keep your head under? There are THOUSANDS of videos - doing just that! One example - kzbin.info/www/bejne/kIu9d32ka7Fpars but they certainly are not hard to find or run into - when delving into a topic.

@antony5502 7 ай бұрын

Yeah i always find that annoying

@Apheem 4 ай бұрын

The noise gate is insane

@Observette 3 ай бұрын

They actually enhanced the audio, check the description.

@Linguae_Music 2 ай бұрын

@@Observette The noise gate is the thing that blocks out small sounds and lets in loud sounds... Like if you want to remove audio information below a certain amplitude - (like sneezes or coughs in the crowd) you can use a noise gate I think what they mean is that the attack and release of the noise gate is quite sharp and noticeable. Fixing the audio later wont change that. Although they could have "enhanced the audio" by applying a noise-gate... in which case nevermind!

@DarkBunnyLord 2 ай бұрын

@@ObservetteAt most they take the original audio and boost/lower it. They can also apply a noise gate which means sounds below a certain level get cut out usually to stop background audio that they don’t want you to hear. Now it is possible the noise gate was awful in the original video meaning they can’t really fix that without some meticulous audio editing but regardless it doesn’t change the criticism that the noise gate is atrocious regardless of if it’s to blame on the source video or the edited reupload.

@dtf-productions6134 2 ай бұрын

It actually is lol

@extendedlines 2 ай бұрын

Yep. I noticed that too.

@_D_W_ 3 ай бұрын

How is the thought of humans not existing too hypothetical? We didn’t exist at one point, now we exist, and at some point… we won’t exist. That’s the most realistic thing you could say about the human race.

@Bungaloo 2 ай бұрын

Epicurus said over 2300 years ago “I was not, I am, I will not be.

@ydem1se 2 ай бұрын

@@Bungaloo “I don’t care” ;)

@crimsonguy723 Ай бұрын

It's actually a tougher question than you think, philosophically. We don't, and can't, actually know anything when we aren't observing said "thing".

@thesemicolonclub 24 күн бұрын

Perception is reality- It would probably apply here. Maybe, from a spiritual point of view, it would be better to say, earth wouldn't exist if it were not for the future creation of humans? So if you believe God made earth for man, I guess it would make sense to think that its too hypothetical. However, something is never created from nothing. Which has always been pretty clear to me, maybe not for some.

@MichaelAronson 19 күн бұрын

@@thesemicolonclub Perception is not reality. We can perceive things that aren't there and miss things that are there. Perception doesn't tell you what is true.

@quietwulf 2 ай бұрын

uurgh, Dillahunty's patience is absolutely insane in the face of the constantly noise assault by Peterson. Let the man make his point damn it.

@thedemolitionmuniciple 2 ай бұрын

sometimes I don't care for how Matt can go off on callers on the shows, but I really shouldn't talk when I have less patience after doing it for decades less than him

@katheareese3234 2 ай бұрын

Exactly! As an open minded Christian I WANTED to hear more of what Matt had to say, and found myself yelling at Jordan to shut up and stop interrupting! And I'm a Jordan Peterson fan! Matt Dillahunty seems to be the most well spoken, calm, and reasonable atheist that I've heard. His words make you think, and I enjoyed listening to him. What I could hear of him. 😅

@vansdan. Ай бұрын

he was holding back. if jbp were a caller he would have ripped him to shreds. on a debate stage, its not quite as appropriate. i could hear him almost doing it a few times but tamed himself

@booboo4963 Ай бұрын

Jordan Peterson is an evasive blowhard and he knows it. I have to give home credit though… I’ve seen him be asked about his personal relationship to faith/religion/god dozens and dozens of times and every time without fail, he manages to give a completely new 2 thousand word nonsensical freshman psychology student lit on high concentrate THC dabs kind of answer. It’s truly a unique and covetous talent he’s developed. And his simpleton fans who just want a daddy that will send them to their room because they’ve been bad, buy it hook line and sinker.

@johnboehmer6683 8 ай бұрын

Love this format of just having a conversation untimed, unregulated. As long as the people discussing our polite, it allows exchange of thought, and response so much more effectively.

@MichaelAronson 8 ай бұрын

What if it wasn't polite? Would that hurt your feelings?

@johnboehmer6683 8 ай бұрын

@@MichaelAronson Mike, why would you check in just to say something antagonistic and obnoxious? Are you ok there buddy? Since it seems you have been unable to figure it out, polite exchanges allow the exchange of ideas where we can follow easily, as opposed to the two of them constantly talking at the same time, or yelling at each other, which is often the case in modern discourse... Not so easy to follow. Which by the way, is yet another downfall of Western society since it turned its back on God, which I dealt with in another comment you responded to. Don't worry, I'll give you the rebuttal you're clamoring for tomorrow, have a good night...

@MichaelAronson 8 ай бұрын

@@johnboehmer6683 "why would you check in" Do you . . . live here? "Not so easy to follow" It just sounds like you have comprehension issues. "yet another downfall of Western society" People yelling is the downfall of western society? I guess that means it's been falling for all of human history.

@johnboehmer6683 8 ай бұрын

@@MichaelAronson You're unfortunately a miserable little man, clearly, you have my sympathy Mike, sincerely. It's got to suck being so empty and devoid of all decency that you can't refrain from pissing on a comment merely expressing a positive opinion about the format of the conversation. That's just pathetic buddy, how did you get this way? I'll be waiting for you to check back in for yet more proof. Dragging atheists through the mud in the process. All the best to you, and all who know you, if you could pass along my sympathies to them as well, thanks.

@MichaelAronson 8 ай бұрын

@@johnboehmer6683 "a comment merely expressing a positive opinion" It was a dumb comment and a dumb opinion. Maybe the internet isn't for you?

@funnybusiness6491 8 ай бұрын

Jordan Peterson explaining why gum sticks to the ground: “Gum sticking to the ground, you know, it's a fascinating collision of human behavior and the tenacious qualities of urban materials. The gum, it's like a symbol of our society's desires, trying to stay connected, but then you have the pavement, so determined to hold onto it. When someone discards that gum, it's like a piece of their identity hitting the pavement, and the ground, it's not just passive, it's an active player in this whole drama. The struggle between the gum's stickiness and the ground's grip, well, it's a bit like the struggle we all face in life - between our dreams and the unyielding realities we encounter. So, next time you step on gum, just remember, it's a reminder of the delicate dance we do with the world around us.”

@rhondaromano4531 8 ай бұрын

Very witty and well written! Love it!

@elliotsumaire5233 8 ай бұрын

This deserves a lot more likes!

@Real_MisterSir 8 ай бұрын

This has more applied intellect poured into it than anything Peterson has ever said tbh

@mike9512 8 ай бұрын

Like most things Peterson says I tune out pretty early into the rambling bs while I wait for him to get to a point. But unlike him, I absolutely enjoyed your comment.

@notrhythm 8 ай бұрын

what a quantum entangled photosynthetic response

@jerrys1426 2 ай бұрын

I loved the discussion. Insightful in many ways, but of value to only a few. So, here we are

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 2 ай бұрын

@jerrys1426 2 ай бұрын

@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 you have done all those horrible things?

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 Ай бұрын

@@jerrys1426 Many of them so i repent like everyone else and Believe the Good news of Jesus Christ for forgiveness of sins

@righteousshift482 14 күн бұрын

@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 "Lusting sexually" isn't a sin. It's a totally normal bodily function and the human race would die out without this desire. Is "being hungry" also a sin? "Needing to take a p*ss"? "Feeling itchy?" This is nonsense. Come on man.

@No_OneV 27 күн бұрын

This was awesome. This is the stuff i love. Both JP and MD did very well !

@yevgeniygrechka6431 5 ай бұрын

This really isn't a religious debate, its a linguistic debate.

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 5 ай бұрын

WHAT IS HE MEANING OF LIFE? To have a relationship with God on earth so you can spend eternity together in Heaven. So, what pushes me away from God? Sin (lying, unforgiveness, sexual sins from lust, dishonouring parents, steeling, taking the Lord’s Name in vain etc) which leads to hell. But Jesus died on the Cross and rose from the dead to give you the ability to repent and Believe in Him as your Lord and Saviour to go to Heaven. Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

@williamcarr459 5 ай бұрын

Fiddlesticks. Any god who would hold these things again me can kiss my proverbial ass.

@valley5617 5 ай бұрын

That’s where Peterson lives

@theQuestion626 5 ай бұрын

@@valley5617 And honestly it’s funny when you see Peterson try to employ tricks of linguistics and changing of definitions in order to hide the fact that he doesn’t have a solid an evidence-based argument. It’s also humorous when he tries to be philosophical, and he just face plants so hard his teeth burst out his ears. His ramblings about metaphysical substrate were hilarious. He doesn’t even make an attempt to define what he means by metaphysical substrate because we know from his past interviews that he has a different understanding of certain definitions and even scientific concepts and even history. It’s hilarious watching him ramble on and on making things up as he goes along and people sit there slack-jawed and clap like seals acting like he’s some kind of titan of intellect.

@jordanchen23 5 ай бұрын

@@theQuestion626 I can't believe I ever fell for Jordan Peterson's bill C-16 hype back in the day. He got me. He got me good.

@waldemarkirszniok298 7 ай бұрын

Isn't it fascinating, that two people, who recieve so much hate on a daily basis about reportedly being disrespectful, debate on a topic to which they have opposite views, and yet they agree on so much and demonstrate an amount of respect towards each other that I haven't seen in public debate in years? This should at least in part in any debate seminar as an example on how it's done.

@stickitupyourasteric 7 ай бұрын

As a leader in any field you can only go so far if you have thin skin.. debate clarifies

@waldemarkirszniok298 7 ай бұрын

@@stickitupyourasteric Sadly perspective skewes the perception and influences said clarity to favor preconcieved notions, but of course, you're right.

@MichaelAronson 7 ай бұрын

@@waldemarkirszniok298 "perspective skewes the perception" All perception is from a perspective. It can't "skew" perception. It's part of the same thing.

@waldemarkirszniok298 7 ай бұрын

@@MichaelAronson It is. But there are different perspectives with their respective biases. Or do you disagree.

@RufusShinra 7 ай бұрын

@@waldemarkirszniok298 Perspective conditions perception to certain degree, that's a fairly acceptable statement, there can be no objective perspective and therefore all perception goes through a skewed prism which is perspective.

@McShag420 2 ай бұрын

I was looking for a video of Kermit the frog reading the dictionary in a stream of consciousness that never reaches it's conclusion and I was not disappointed.

@CaptainOnePocket 2 ай бұрын

Best comment! That's great.

@the-ambivalent-orthographer 2 ай бұрын

...the best part is the waving hands while he ribbits ...so captivating.

@phutureproof 2 ай бұрын

cmon bro you can do better than name calling, cant you?

@kcfreeman3021 2 ай бұрын

Well, I can't. Fuck jp and the shoulders his dumb head rode in on.

@MichaelAronson 2 ай бұрын

@@phutureproofKermit the Peterson doesn't deserve better.

@garyfisher8458 3 ай бұрын

Petersen: "I want there to be something more than this." Dullahunty: "okay..."

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 28 күн бұрын

The issue at hand is sin and God’s nature of being just. Sin brings suffering (the pleasure is short term, and the suffering is long term-on earth and in hell forever). God brings Righteousness (may have short term suffering followed by long term pleasure- on earth and in Heaven). If you love yourself repent of your sins (lying, hatred, unforgiveness, sexual sins, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, stealing, dishonouring your parents etc) & believe in Jesus for forgiveness of sins. (Jesus died on the Cross as a sacrifice and defeated death by rising from the dead)

@McShag420 14 күн бұрын

@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 That shit is all made up.

@amemename 9 күн бұрын

Sooo… what’s your point.

@jaydeejohnson7 5 күн бұрын

@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 That's just, like, your opinion, man. Why should I believe?

@thea2696 Күн бұрын

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 there is no issue at hand. You're making baseless claims. Suffering is subjective.

@briandoerfler726 4 ай бұрын

Everyone: Matt won this debate Jordan Peterson: well that depends how you define "won" 🤡🤡

@nicholasullery5129 3 ай бұрын

One speaking abstractly and one speaking concretely. I think you missed his point

@valroniclehre193 3 ай бұрын

@@nicholasullery5129 Petersons abstractions have a pattern. It is the willful obfuscation between god as a reality and god as a metaphor. He wont even answer the most basic questions in a clear enough way to talk about them in any meaningful way. If he were stupid I would assume it was incidental. But hes a master of language. This is intentional, in line with a clear financial incentive to not distance the two sides of his audience. Hes to vague to be called right or wrong. So hes wrong.

@versatilejams 3 ай бұрын

One always supposes the proposition of “win” implies the defeat or unremarkable characteristics of something in comparison. But upon what criteria is the winner chosen? When we speak of time, we say that it’s relative…. I swear, he’s got the most long-winded and verbose ways of arguing ridiculous points. Two and two does not make five, not matter how much word salad you dress it up with.

@flashraylaser157 3 ай бұрын

@@nicholasullery5129Well maybe he should stop the bullshit and speak concretely like we do anything else real.

@BluishNomad 3 ай бұрын

@@flashraylaser157 Would you say math is real?

@triedbythefire4777 6 ай бұрын

Jordan- "It's not an obvious fact!" Matt- "That chopping off someone's head is not beneficial to someone's well-being?" Jordan- "Well, that depends on how you define well-being!" 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Absolute classic Jordan response!!! I never thought he would take it that far!!!😂😂

@smokeydiamond489 6 ай бұрын

Can't stand the guy. He obviously ain't as smart as Matt. Matt's arrogant af but chit he's smart

@triedbythefire4777 6 ай бұрын

@@smokeydiamond489 Lol, you're ignorant

@MichaelAronson 6 ай бұрын

@@triedbythefire4777 Incredible, you have literally no arguments.

@smokeydiamond489 6 ай бұрын

He should be removed from the stage for pulling this shit

@triedbythefire4777 6 ай бұрын

@@smokeydiamond489 Pulled off the stage for thinking more than others? Pulled off the stage for not simply excepting axioms without properly understanding the implications? Pulled off the stage for not being lazy? You're calling that "sh**"? Listen to yourself.

@Ms.Arcane Ай бұрын

Absolutely loved them both deeply. My favorite philosopher will always be Mr. Alan Watts! 💯🔥✌🏽

@Jazzmasterman32 2 ай бұрын

The lack of static in the audio is distracting.

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 Ай бұрын

People often say, “I’m not hurting anyone so it’s ok to sin (lying, stealing, sexual sins, disrespecting parents etc)” The same God who said to love your neighbour first said to love Him to the best of your ability. If you carry on sinning, then you do not love God but are selfish like the devil so you will be joined to your father in hell or repent of your sins and believe in Jesus as God so Jesus adopts you as His child and you will join Him in Heaven forever.

@germantoenglish898 8 ай бұрын

“If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” - W.C. Fields

@kentonbaird1723 8 ай бұрын

I feel neither baffled nor dazzled, just vaguely irritated.

@germantoenglish898 8 ай бұрын

@@kentonbaird1723 vaguely is good. It's positive. 🤣

@saintsword23 8 ай бұрын

Wow, what an thoughtful, resounding, and insightful analysis of the arguments. You really addressed the pragmatic argument Dr. Peterson made for example, that effective beliefs imply true beliefs. You also had insightful commentary on how this argument is usually used by scientific materialists and it's ironic that Peterson is using it in favor of arguing for God. So well done addressing his actual arguments.

@kentonbaird1723 8 ай бұрын

@@saintsword23 are you copy-pasting this onto every comment that judges quack Peterson too harshly?

@saintsword23 8 ай бұрын

@@kentonbaird1723 I'll do it for any comment that ad hominem's Matt too. I'm not a JBP fanboy and I agree far more with Matt in this debate. I'm just sick of seeing ad hominems and stupidity EVERYWHERE I GO. Debate the actual arguments. Have a conversation of substance rather than "whose expert has the biggest dick."

@lipgloss202 4 ай бұрын

The metaphorical substrate is strong in this one. May the Force be with you!

@ABC-li4he 3 ай бұрын

😂

@jernellrosenthal9210 3 ай бұрын

😂😂😂

@stephenfrench3888 3 ай бұрын

👍😂

@talonnightstar 2 ай бұрын

😂😂😂😂😂😂

@sabin97 2 ай бұрын

i was gonna comment in the metaphorical substrate and jungian archetypal hierarchy.......but you beat me to it.....well done!

@mayhu3282 Ай бұрын

What a clown JP is, really. I sometimes get cross with MD when he gets too aggressive but this was wonderful, to see him so collected and calm while tye other one just struggled. Even the body language of both was so revealing!!

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 11 күн бұрын

@rippedtorn2310 2 ай бұрын

Confusing tripping halucination as reality is dangerous . Ive pulled Celtic knots out of the Scottish countryside and heard the bizarre music of what i percieved as my ancestors permeating through time and it was profound and life changing experience buuuuut i came down . I really enjoyed all the mushroom trips i had but ive never seen them as happening outside my head . JP is a very confused guy .

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 18 күн бұрын

@rippedtorn2310 14 күн бұрын

@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 save your evil cult teachings for someone else ..better yet , understand its all made up gibberish that makes zero sense .

@TylerHartgrove 8 ай бұрын

It seems Sam Harris got the raw end of this debate.

@AsifKhan-hf9zy 8 ай бұрын

he probably threw himself off a stage after he watched this.

@iymspartacus7089 8 ай бұрын

Sam hasn’t been doing his own reputation any favors lately either. Poor guy!

@nicholaskoenig3106 8 ай бұрын

Haha!! Indeed.

@fredrikfjeld1575 8 ай бұрын

@@iymspartacus7089 Well, he hasn't tried to ruin his reputation as much as Peterson, Rogan, Crowder and the likes. Almost mentioned Shapiro, but he never had much repuitation to begin with

@jessereichbach588 8 ай бұрын

@@fredrikfjeld1575 So it's all about politics eh?

@redscarecomixx 13 күн бұрын

I am impressed at the honesty and respectfulness of both these individuals. Well done

@Molten-Throne 2 ай бұрын

Great talk. I really enjoyed this. I really hope they can talk in the future and get really into the nitty gritty of their beliefs

@thedemolitionmuniciple 2 ай бұрын

Peterson getting into the nitty gritty would involve him being clear and concise on anything at all, which would dismantle most of the ideas he has. Dillahunty could get into the nitty gritty of his beliefs if he had any, or he can delve deeper into the evidence that disproves those of Peterson.

@SageWon-1aussie 2 ай бұрын

Peterson refuses to engage with Dillahunty after this debate.

@calebalton2084 4 ай бұрын

Jordan seems to have forgotten about the pre Greek scientists found in Egypt, in Sumeria, who built pyramids, developed writing, built ships, chariots, and had other ancient technological and mathematical knowledge long before the Greeks appeared on the scene.

@muddywaters1472 3 ай бұрын

People like Jordan always "forget" when it's convenient for them 🤷🤷🤷

@PsychicSploob 3 ай бұрын

One of my biggest issues with JP whenever I was interested in his lectures was that he really just ignored everything outside of his care, even though it would have been perfectly relevant and substantive to his philosophies. He’s very willfully ignorant.

@DieLazergurken 3 ай бұрын

What’s your point?

@vampirgirl41 3 ай бұрын

Peterson would probably say that it's because of the Gods that they had being an approach to the devine that exists. All of our social fabric existing is based on that and even 10000 years ago when tribes began evolving at a higher rate, it was due to moral standards based on solidarity, which is based on an approach to find God or to communicate what God is and all of that makes sense because of our modern understanding of God xD This is what this clown would probably say because he went in that direction xD

@ltmund 3 ай бұрын

Are you not confusing science with engineering?

@stevedriscoll2539 6 ай бұрын

I am glad there are people tough enough and willing to have these discussions. Respect to both participants.

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 6 ай бұрын

God is the epitome of Holiness because He is sinlessly perfect, A sinner (liar, sexually immoral, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, thief etc) cannot be in the presence of God or else he will be utterly consumed therefore repent of your sins and put your faith in Jesus as your Lord and Saviour to go to Heaven.

@hughmac13 6 ай бұрын

They ain't volunteering, friend. You'd find the toughness (though I'd dispute the necessity of that quality) and the willingness too if you were earning at the rate these discussions permit.

@stevedriscoll2539 6 ай бұрын

@@hughmac13 You may be right, but I find it just a tad cynical, but be that as it may, I find them useful and instructive, thanks for the feedback

@stevedriscoll2539 6 ай бұрын

@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 ok, fine I would hope I have the courage to stand up and fight for your right to believe as you do and put voice to it...I, however, found Hitchens (and others) arguments more compelling on why their is no evidence that what you are saying is true, even though, sometimes, I wish it were

@thotmas3097 5 ай бұрын

We’ve been having this conversation for eons. There’s no proof god exists let’s move on

@Qred09 2 ай бұрын

I love watching both of these people. They both are very knowledgeable quick thinkers and great speakers

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 18 күн бұрын

@Qred09 18 күн бұрын

@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 nah, ima need god to clearly communicate to me before i just blindly say “ok its real” That doesnt stop me from trying to be a better person. Pretty simple. No deity needed

@williamsonah5667 Ай бұрын

1:09:04 those who argue in the comments that jordan Peterson is dancing around the subject without making a point, this is the point that you are missing..... See, Peterson is not a fundamentalist christian as someone erroneously states in the comments.... He's arguably not even religious at all or at least in the conventional sense. what he is, is a highly intelligent person who is capable of complexity and nuance. He doesn't think in terms of ‘atheists vs fundamentalist christians’ as most of you do and his position is made very clear by this 1:01:23 response. His argument is, you cant simply do away with religion, because as incredible as modern era secularist thought has made it seem, there's a lot truth to what religion espouses, and that much is made evident by many of the constructs upon which the modern society (especially the western society) is built. Also, many point to his “metaphorical substrate” phrase as evidence that he uses Sophisticated but meaningless academic terminology to his buttress his arguments and make them seem more impressive than they actually are... Let me make it easy for you Metaphor - a thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else. Substrate - an underlying substance or layer. The phrase simply means that our morals and beliefs are subconsciously based on metaphors and allegories that we derive from religion. One could argue that he's not a very good debater because he shows very little concern in making his point understandable by the audience, but that argument is very different from ‘he resorts to flamboyant diction because his main arguments are rather banal and uninteresting’, a claim made by far too many in the comments

@MichaelAronson Ай бұрын

"there's a lot of truth to what religion espouses" And there's also a lot of nonsense. What's great is you can keep the true parts without the religion. Religion is entirely unnecessary.

@MichaelAronson Ай бұрын

"he resorts to flamboyant diction" The issue is he deliberately obfuscates. Notice he never answers any questions directly. That's because what he actually believes would alienate his audience, so he runs around in circles to disguise any point he wants to convey.

@RA-ie3ss Ай бұрын

@@MichaelAronson"can keep the true true parts without the religion...." Why have you failed so far? Give an example of you keeping the true parts without the religion.

@MichaelAronson Ай бұрын

@@RA-ie3ss An example of things that are true, fashie? You mean every field of science? Did religion create the phone and the internet you're whining on?

@righteousshift482 13 күн бұрын

Yes but the very term "metaphor" implies a latent, underlying "substratal" meaning. So "substrate" is redundant. Narrative tales with metaphorical meaning permeate our culture. Aesop's fables, the Brothers Grimm, Hans Christian Andersen etc. Long before the bible arrived (and after), this was being done in various forms. The point of these stories is to showcase a principle or idea, generally in an unusual situation, which can then be extrapolated into general usage e.g., _"If you have an advantage but become complacent, you may come unstuck."_ (Tortoise and Hare - Aesop) Peterson's contention is that _"these stories are true as evidenced by their successful absorption into memetic culture."_ However I think a more refined, less reductionist analysis would be... _Acknowledging principles within long-standing memetic stories confers survival benefit. The stories are fiction, but applying the principle within can prove a beneficial heuristic._ These are two very different definitions. We can dispense with "God" while still acknowledging wisdom within certain biblical stories. After all, we don't need God to appreciate arguably much better works of literature (Shakespeare, Aurelius, Mill etc.)

@X4lkor 4 ай бұрын

As a computer scientist one thing I found very odd was Peterson's statement that AI are not rule based systems. Ignoring the fact that he meant machine learning not AI (most AI systems are rule based in the classical sense) but even ML systems are rule based, we just allow them to change their rules while they learn, and often the rules they generate are not easy to interpret, but that in know way means that they are not rule based. The standard ML model is to multiply the input by a value, add a value and then pass it through a function. You do this a certain number of times and the result is the output of the model. I see no reasonable way to describe that as not being a rule-based system. Perhaps he means that human minds are not capable of discovering the proper rules on our own, but to Matt's point, we are doing what the ML systems are. We guess at what the rules are, and if a rule makes a bad outcome we change it. This is the exact way the ML algorithms act intelligently

@dougschneider8243 4 ай бұрын

I too really opened my eyes at that part, because computers are my background, too -- educationally and professionally. He's flat-out wrong -- but what it does show you is that Peterson is happy to talk authoritatively about topics he has no knowledge about. Quite embarrassingly, actually, in this case.

@webdactic 4 ай бұрын

I thought this. ML really just a way of capturing rules mathematically that are too complicated for us to linguistically (verbally or in code) express. Though neither of them seem to appreciate this, I think there may actually be a good analogy here with what Peterson was saying about brain hemispheres. The linguistic left hemisphere maybe is more like a standard piece of code with simple verbally expressed rules. If Sam angers me then don't throw him off the stage except if there's a fire. Not sure we humans really act much along these lines. Then the extra-linguistic right hemisphere maybe is more like ML that is trained by exposure to the world, its culture, narratives, art, symbols, etc. When we feel in our gut that we shouldn't throw Sam off the stage, there's surely some learned rules at play there that are a lot more complex, but it's really just the "sum" of our input/experience. Maybe one day with a brain scan, we could extract this learning as a table of numbers. If anyone can connect any of this thought splurge back to whether Peterson believes in God or not, please go ahead. I still don't know what he means by God.

@dca4840 4 ай бұрын

He needs to stay in his lane.

@JTeya0 4 ай бұрын

😂😂😂 that's what you took from the whole discussion

@sudowtf 4 ай бұрын

I am happy to see someone else point this out. For a while I was dabbling with A.I. before I set my interest on Game Development. I had read many, many things on A.I. development with most of its categories. As far as I know, every single program of any kind needs to be rule based because without rules, a computer simply doesn’t know what to do or how to do things. Hearing JP say his thoughts opened my eyes to just how phony he really is. He speaks on things he knows nothing about with great authority quite often. Ask anyone with a little bit of programming knowledge the question if a program can not be rule based and they will answer with a “no”, everybody knows this

@josephvickers7426 6 ай бұрын

"I don't believe in God" Matt "Well if you take drugs you might!!!!" Jordan

@dkhan88942 4 ай бұрын

Everything with a name exist

@MichaelAronson 4 ай бұрын

@@dkhan88942 Does Batman exist?

@gelberfubelag4717 4 ай бұрын

@@MichaelAronson in the same world god and all other fantasy dudes live.

@erh3196 3 ай бұрын

@@dkhan88942 my imaginary friend has a name

@griffinturner5046 3 ай бұрын

Yeah you’re so much smarter than the guys in the debate.

@FFX_Memes Ай бұрын

This was a fantastic discussion. It really pushed the limits of just how deep this topic can be delved into. And considering the multiple instances where both Matt and Jordan had to sideswipe perpendicular topics for the sake of time leaves an incredible amount of discussion left unsaid. Hope these two cross paths again one day.

@MichaelAronson Ай бұрын

"It really pushed the limits of just how deep this topic can be delved into." No limits were pushed. Word salad was served.

@FFX_Memes Ай бұрын

@@MichaelAronsonWhat do you mean by word salad? Does that mean you didn’t find any of the dialogue in the video meaningful or coherent?

@MichaelAronson Ай бұрын

@@FFX_Memes Meaningful? No, not particularly.

@FFX_Memes Ай бұрын

@@MichaelAronson Gotcha. So why are you here then?

@FFX_Memes Ай бұрын

Oh-wait-forget it. Just noticed you’ve been the policeman of this comment section for the previous several months. I could go along with it if were a week tops, but my goodness man. Best of luck to your future.

@MalkuthEmperor 2 ай бұрын

46:08 the bottle oppening at the end of that statement and then the silence was so funny 😂😂😂

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 11 күн бұрын

@stephenfreeman4256 4 ай бұрын

I wish I was a student in Dr. Peterson's class when he taught at university. For every test question I would reply with "well its really really really hard to explain" or "what do you mean by that?" He would have to pass me because he does this every time he gets asked a straight forward questions in a debate. Dr. Peterson; master of equivocation.

@tomy8339 4 ай бұрын

You have to understand the context of that question in relation to the metaphorical substrate of critical analysis. 😅

@ghost79ish 4 ай бұрын

Not really. A debate is a much different format than a test. Much of what goes into a good debate includes defining of terms and clarifications for the people of participating in the debate and for the audience. Yeah, this can be a bit tedious, but it's essential for a quality conversation like this, especially when the two people debating are coming from very different perspectives and trying to find some common ground to work from.

@RyanGetLow 4 ай бұрын

He's insufferable. He just just likes to hear himself talk. He rambles and panders to the point of boredom. I think he blacks out when he talks, and only comes to when he's run out of words and/or forgets what he's even talking about. Either way, he's completely expecting you to be so amazed with what he thinks is a profound and well thought out response. He's too used to preaching to college kids in a classroom. It's good to see him get his foot put in his mouth.

@404errorpagenotfound.6 4 ай бұрын

@@RyanGetLowiPad baby, your a joke.

@404errorpagenotfound.6 4 ай бұрын

@@RyanGetLowiPad baby?

@james-cz4xx 8 ай бұрын

I quit smoking with no religious/mystical experience or drugs of any kind. You get beyond the first three days and don't hang around others that smoke and you're good.

@fgoindarkg 8 ай бұрын

My experience exactly. Peterson is a self deluded fool. If it's in a book he believes it.

@caiofernando 8 ай бұрын

Yes, that argument is laughable.

@ActionGamerAaron 8 ай бұрын

What were you smoking that's not a drug? You seem very confused about what was even discussed in the debate.

@james-cz4xx 8 ай бұрын

@@ActionGamerAaron you may want to ratchet the part they went over about quitting smoking. It was said that you cannot do it without religion or drugs. I'm evidence to the contrary.

@Billy-id9kb 6 ай бұрын

This is what you got from this debate?? Good luck in life and beyond.

@JustShotsForMeh 2 ай бұрын

I took a fair bit of psychedelics, mushrooms included. Yes, it was extremely powerful, unbelievable, and indescribable, with that said, it was not mystical, I came out of this experience covered in sweat realizing that this is what the brain is capable of, that is in my opinion more impressive than contact with the supernatural. I took a substance, the molecule interacted with my neurotransmitters, thus making me see myself in third person burning in orange flames, I myself felt as if I've reached divinity under the drug, forget monotheism, I could fist fight Jesus and win in that form, but the reality was that I was just a sweaty shirtless man standing in a middle of a road, my subjective perception goes contrary to reality, it was not supernatural, which could be evident if somebody filmed me during my experience, the illegal drug had drug effects on the drug user.

@Hakasedess 2 ай бұрын

What really comes through here is, more than anything, that JBP doesn't fucking know shit and really just loves his own voice Matt Dillahunty speaks using everyday language, directly goes to his point whenever he opens his mouth JBP just starts a fucking stream of consciousness, with absolutely no endpoint, talking like he swallowed a thesaurus for very obviously no other reason than to project sophistication. And he never gets to a point. Seriously, you can listen to Matt speak for a minute, and you know EXACTLY what he meant, and you can reasonably say "yeah that'd take me a minute too" You can listen to JBP talking for 30 minutes, and if you understand anything you have a heroic attention span, but you'd invariably go "that'd take me 2 minutes to express BETTER than him"

@user-tp8ut7cs6j 15 күн бұрын

JP just vomits words on the people he debates to distract them. It's like trying to beat a person at a chess match by screaming and arm waving in order to distract them and keep them from thinking clearly while they're trying to make their next move.

@Krikenemp18 8 ай бұрын

I usually don't care for the Q&A section of debates (the questions are often poorly framed and/or have ulterior motives behind them), but this is a rare case where I think it was the most interesting part of the debate. Fantastic questions with fantastic answers.

@FilDoyon 7 ай бұрын

I totally agree with you. These questions was just amazing and sincerely asked with curiosity. Which is very rare. I really liked the introduction of Matt to the Q&A session. Haha. It seems to have done the job and brilliant persons stood up for asking pretty relevant questions.

@MrMedicalUK 8 ай бұрын

Peterson really loves to say a lot without actually saying anything

@hypno5690 8 ай бұрын

I see this comment a lot, why do you people seem to not be able to pick up on abstract thought? You don't see the assembly of ideas into a structure? If you can't measure it with a ruler it doesn't exist?

@MrMedicalUK 8 ай бұрын

@@hypno5690 Philosophy is weak

@caiofernando 8 ай бұрын

@@hypno5690he's just really bad at it.

@hypno5690 8 ай бұрын

@@caiofernando I have no trouble following and his lines of thought are more solid than most.

@gtothereal 14 күн бұрын

Very original comment.

@ScoobyYTP 2 ай бұрын

I believe that having such debates more than usual, would be of much benefit to our understanding of this idea of believing something supernatural. I'd like to know other people's thoughts and opinions on this topic

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 2 ай бұрын

@Mr.TeETH78 2 ай бұрын

Talking in circles is what Jordan Peterson does. He starts from the supposition that he is right and you are wrong. There’s no debating with a closed mind.

@booboo4963 Ай бұрын

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 Күн бұрын

@jackredden3445 5 ай бұрын

Imagine a political debate that could be even 1/10th this informational, honest, and polite. Two great minds, that I heavily respect.

@MichaelAronson 5 ай бұрын

"this informational" What information did you perceive?

@jackredden3445 5 ай бұрын

@@MichaelAronson You didn't receive a single piece of information from this 2 hour debate? They both are informing us on their beliefs, and doing their best to dissect and converse on the other person's beliefs.

@MichaelAronson 5 ай бұрын

@@jackredden3445 "They both are informing us on their beliefs" Opinions and beliefs aren't information.

@jackredden3445 4 ай бұрын

@@MichaelAronson really? So to know that Hitler believed Jewish people were less than human, and his opinions on how they should be treated, that knowledge isn't information? I believe you are an annoying troll, and my opinion is that you should get a new hobby besides trying to annoy people online. Hopefully this informs you of my belief and opinion. If that's even possible in your brain.

@exyiseyres 4 ай бұрын

You owe me some pants

@M123OCT 4 ай бұрын

I've been following JP for years now, and I suppose I'd be described as a 'fan'. But, recently I feel like I'm shaking off the illusion that he's always right. This is the first time I've seen him squirm with discomfort, clearly aware that his clever linguistic party tricks and convoluted arguments are simply outgunned by common sense. I hate to admit it, but MD outclassed the master here, without resorting to smoke screens and straw-man arguments.

@andresgarciacastro1783 4 ай бұрын

After this debate, JP won't debate Matt again.

@M123OCT 4 ай бұрын

@@andresgarciacastro1783 I'd heard that. Although, to be fair, I did only hear it from MD. I suppose you never what happens behind the scenes. 👍

@andresgarciacastro1783 4 ай бұрын

"Outgunned by common sense ". Nailed it.

@xMaGuSx888 2 ай бұрын

Why do even like JP at all if you think he uses "Clever linguistic party tricks and convoluted arguments"? Those aren't the behaviors of an intellectual who wants to have an honest conversation in the pursuit of truth and mutual understanding. They are tactics of someone who just wants to win a discussion and sound superior by using word salad. Something JP lives on and his fans eat up.

@M123OCT 2 ай бұрын

@@xMaGuSx888 Because life and complex topics are not black and white. Sometimes he's right; sometimes he's wrong. If you see life through such a simplistic lens, you never learn anything. 👍

@fireroastedfire 2 ай бұрын

Jordan Peterson needs to not talk about AI. As a developer, all AI and mavhine learning is based on a set of rules, heuristics, and goals. ALL machine everything can only do what the rules allow for, thats why "rogue AI" stuff in scifi is so frustrating to those of us who know how AI and Machine Learning work

@thesemicolonclub 24 күн бұрын

Can you program AI how to respond to death, persay? Or do they take all the information of death and how people perceive death and just act in accordance? I am not sure that is the best question - because you can directly program AI, I am sure. But if you don't, how do you think...lets say a robot with a sophisticated AI would respond to death in front of them without being specifically programmed to act a certain way? Just a question I was thinking about the other day. Kind of neat to really brainstorm that stuff.

@user-tp8ut7cs6j 14 күн бұрын

@@thesemicolonclub A system using A.I. is not self aware so it has no understanding of death. It could be trained to avoid situations that are detrimental to it by programmers though. You could argue that being taught to avoid dangerous situations is a basic "understanding" of death but I think you're just delving into semantics at that point.

@darkestfenex2274 12 күн бұрын

@@user-tp8ut7cs6ji saw a clip of a bot that moved forward to keep a shelf from falling on a kid. That was cool

@Narwal88 2 ай бұрын

JP shows what happens when you didn't know the exam was today

@eanieilias9739 Ай бұрын

I don't know man, seemed like there were a lot of disconnect the last time I watched this. JP was explaining things through his symbolic views and Matt didn't get it so it didn't really get anywhere aside from surface level.

@Narwal88 Ай бұрын

@@eanieilias9739 that's not what happened at all. JP spewed a lot of meaningless gibberish, useful to confuse pseudo-intellectuals, and MD called him out on it. The audience member's simple question about god existing after we all die just shows what a fraud JP is when asked to give a simple answer. He can't.

@paulreader1777 Ай бұрын

Excellent observation. And as I remember being told on some of my written papers - you waffle: you have written what you don't believe and you don't believe what you have written. This is classic Peterson vacuous hot air.

@jamesiiimcnabb6358 Ай бұрын

In calculus class the girl behind me was always blown away caused I'd never know when the tests were. But I didn't need to know.

@MichaelAronson Ай бұрын

@@eanieilias9739 Word salad isn't any level.

@rivera8545 3 ай бұрын

I quit smoking (14 yrs ago-2024), "cold turkey;" never took mushrooms or anything to quit. I just stopped and have never gone back. I didn't want the bad health and decided to quit and never had issues wanting to ever smoke again. Irony is that after some years, it became offense- the smell and 2nd hand fume-to me, and many arguments in the years, because of my distaste for it.

@HectorConCarne. 3 ай бұрын

Power to you

@sukottoshinobe7360 3 ай бұрын

Same here. I have also done mushrooms acid and god knows however many other drugs over the years. And even though I was a dinosaur that melted into a log in my fire place that became part of the flames in one of my trips, doesn’t make me a dinosaur made of flames in reality. I was just on drugs. I quit smoking many years after doing drugs based on a personal decision after years of sobriety. So I find it interesting that Jordan claims because you have a trip on drugs that is proof of the supernatural.

@tbug50 3 ай бұрын

Same here. When he said you can stop smoking without a supernatural experience and Jordan goes “mmmm not really” I was just like huh…

@oddindian1 3 ай бұрын

The Belligerent Hyper intellectualism can be blind at times to human capability. Yet medical impossibilities happen all the time. The ceiling to what is possible is always shattered. Power to you for overcoming an addiction and accomplishing something that honors your life.

@PyrrhicPax 3 ай бұрын

Did you quit eating all turkey or just smoked turkey?

@Johnsworth61 8 ай бұрын

Thank you for reuploading this with higher volume.

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 2 ай бұрын

@siddid7620 3 ай бұрын

Damn Dillahunty really sliced through JBP's sophistry...

@FlorissMusic 3 ай бұрын

right! it was pretty shocking to see hahaha

@IYPITWL 3 ай бұрын

Sophistry is the absolute best word to describe JP in this debate.

@johnfoster144 3 ай бұрын

You mean what is what? Didn't hold water for you? Let's debate the verbage of wellbeing and it's implicit expectation as it applies to people in general because exceptions exist... Man JP is an idiot. I can't have a discussion on the merits of generally excerpted principles, because then I wouldn't get to say I have a PHD. Like yes or no, do you think it's better to be a millionaire asshole only respected by tools, or just be a moderately reasonable human being... We all know how JP answers, "let's define a millionaire, like are we talking specifically from 1 million up to $999,999,999, cause until you give me an exact number that I agree upon is a millionaire..."

@hurtingmurphy 2 ай бұрын

Guess you didn’t watch the same debate haha

@Scawtsauce 2 ай бұрын

@@hurtingmurphy please point out a statement where you think Jordan Peterson made a good point?

@bozinoski Ай бұрын

Jordan Peterson explaining why the door closes when we push it: Well, you see, the concept of the door closing when you push it is deeply intertwined with the very essence of human existence and the existential struggles we face on a daily basis. From a Jungian perspective, the door symbolizes a threshold, a passage from one state of being to another, much like the archetypal hero's journey. When we push the door, we are not merely exerting physical force, but we are also engaging in a metaphorical battle against the unknown, against chaos itself. Now, if we delve deeper into the mechanics of the door, we must consider Newton's laws of motion, particularly the third law which states that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. So, when we push the door, we apply a force to it, and in response, the door applies an equal and opposite force on us. This interaction creates a moment of equilibrium, a delicate balance between our will and the resistance of the door.But why does the door ultimately close? Ah, that is where the intricacies of physics come into play. You see, the door is mounted on hinges, and these hinges introduce a rotational component to the motion of the door. As we push the door, the force we apply causes it to rotate around its hinges, gradually swinging shut. However, the closure of the door is not merely a consequence of physical laws; it also reflects the deeper patterns of order and structure that govern our universe. Just as the door closes to maintain the integrity of the space it encloses, so too do we, as individuals, strive to establish boundaries and maintain order in our lives. In essence, the closing of the door when we push it is a microcosm of the eternal struggle between order and chaos, between the known and the unknown. It is a reminder that even in the simplest actions of our daily lives, we are engaged in a constant battle to impose meaning and structure upon the world around us.

@terminusest5902 2 ай бұрын

Science was developed largely from philosophy . Philosophy, such as with the ancient Greeks develop the understanding of debating and logic. The next major step was to develop theories that can be developed, proven, unproven or improved through a logical and physical way and tests can be reproduced or not. Good theories can be used to predict future observations. But even well accepted theories can be disproven at times. And better theories developed. And developing the scientific process. It is the vigorous use of the scientific process that has greatly improved science . Better in a physical manner and not necessarily morally better. Moral values are constantly changing and especially in modern times with such rapid advances in technology. Many people felt evolution was immoral for many people in the past and still now. But now much acceptable. The moral and religious opposition partly comes through ignorance. And the scientific understanding of evolution continues to be proven and improved with more science. Showing that even Darwin can be improved on. Such as with the development of modern genetics. With such great advances in technology over the last few centuries people have become more adaptable in science as well as morally. Hopefully for the better. As a strange example of conflicting values is the development of penicillin during WW2. Though millions of people died in that conflict advances in science and technology were very rapid with great value. Penicillin being an example. Penicillin has likely saved more lives than died during WW2. Both in direct use and inspiring new medical technologies. Modern surgery has been greatly advanced due to the reduced risks of infection. As an indirect value coming from penicillin and more modern antibiotics. And came to be developed despite the terrible human cost of WW2. Penicillin also had a huge impact on prevention of the terrible effects of Syphilis. Which was a deadly disease with a long and painful death. And often insanity. GPI, General Paralysis of the Insane. Leading to changing moral values by making sex much safer. In many ways syphilis was worse than HIV/AIDS and more deadly. HIV/AIDS also impacted social change and morality by challenging views on homosexuality. All of this demonstrates science impacting societies. China had some great thinkers of incredible stature. But the Chinese did not have an effective scientific process. This sometimes failed to develop the underlying process or a method of improvement. Rather than using a process Chinese science was sometimes explained in an spiritual way. Debate and argument may have been less effective. This attitude is likely changing rapidly. Generally science has good impacts. Though sometimes at cost. So science first needed a competitive and logical process. Science built on ancient philosophy and logic. This gave the western world a great advantage. Using the scientific process.

@treztreiz6370 4 ай бұрын

Please tell me when JP actually answers a question

@PortmanRd 4 ай бұрын

He seems to make a habit of promoting his own agenda whilst sidestepping any questions directed to him.

@andresgarciacastro1783 4 ай бұрын

He's there to sell books, patreon subscriptions and other products, he isn't actually engaging.

@cantstanditanymore 4 ай бұрын

Your just too dμmmmm to comprehend..🤦🏼‍♀️🤷🏼‍♀️

@sirllamaiii9708 3 ай бұрын

@@andresgarciacastro1783yeah I don't think he's a good representative of Christianity whatsoever. He's just here because he's popular.

@RafaelValle12 3 ай бұрын

@sirllamaiii9708 hes here because he's a thinker and a good communicator. He actively seeks the truth. I don't believe he's a Christian at all, though he does see the merit of its existence for society

@steelcom5976 3 ай бұрын

@11:24 Peterson refers to a study on psilocybin and the effect of a mystical experience that induces someone to quit smoking. I found the study, or trial. But it isn't a trial. I would call it a vague, inexplicable observation. It didn't come up to even one of the number of standards that would constitute a trial. There were only 15 subjects (trials require at least 100), it was not randomized, it wasn't double-blind, there was no placebo group, and it didn't list any possible bias nor conflict of interest that could diminish the strength of the conclusion. In any case, the trial never concluded that it proved the existence of mystical experiences.

@MisterG2323 3 ай бұрын

Peterson betrayed his biased ignorance with that bit of nonsense. I've been an atheist for decades, and recently quit smoking. Cold turkey. No drugs, no deity, no magic, no mystic experience, just a decision made and followed. Prove me wrong, Jordan, you pedantic obscurantist!

@phillystevesteak6982 3 ай бұрын

Yo, I know people personally with mystical experiences. I had a friend Mike who began fervently believing in God and aliens after taking acid regularly for months. This is definitely a thing. Anyone who's been involved in psychedelics knows people who have been "changed" by a profound, overwhelming psychedelic trip. Anecdotl, yes. But still come on. This is obviously a recurring phenomenon. That being said, I've done all kinds of psychedelics. I don't believe in the supernatural. But I get how these drugs could essentially do the opposite of PTSD. So, there ya go

@steelcom5976 3 ай бұрын

@@phillystevesteak6982 Let's review. You've taken lots of drugs and it has advanced your critical thinking skills to such a high level that not only can you evaluate yourself correctly but all the others in your social group.

@MisterG2323 3 ай бұрын

@@phillystevesteak6982 Having a "mystical" experience while on psychedelics in no way demonstrates anything supernatural. All it demonstrates is one of the effects of consuming psychedelics. Nothing more.

@phillystevesteak6982 3 ай бұрын

Read the VERY end paragraph of my comment @@MisterG2323

@golightlyproject 3 ай бұрын

This is what was written in Matthew saying to some were given the gift of understanding and others, no…. That those who do not have, they lose even what they do have.

@golightlyproject 3 ай бұрын

Very solid debate…. A lot of dodging, but still reached depths most avoid.

@kwinterskjw 3 ай бұрын

1:13:00 the reason we all have this underlying common sense driving our actions is because through evolution species all have valued survival. Those that don't, won't, and cannot pass on their genes. Humans and many other species go further and use social structures like cooperation to increase the odds of survival. Wolves for example hunt in packs as did early humans. There is an explanation for how some of those meta morals come from. The feeling that you get that tells you less death less suffering is preferable. There is actually an evolutionary preference for our species as a whole to survive and one of the methods that has come about through evolution is social cooperation.

@wawangunawan9355 2 ай бұрын

so how do you respond to animals that eats their own species? if that theory is true, you have to know it needs to be consistent across everything…I don’t wanna hold my belief on something inconsistent… if morals are subjective, i can kill a person now, and say to you all “why do you all condemn me? i made my own morals..you have to respect my moral as well”…but nooo….straight away people know that it is wrong to kill people.. we may have relative moral…but there were some moral absolutes that we can uphold onto

@ContentClipCentral 2 ай бұрын

and yet we smoke, drink alcohol, eat trash, do drugs.. why do we choose to do that if we value survival so much?

@kwinterskjw 2 ай бұрын

@ContentClipCentral seems like you might want to reach out to a psychologist. If you are doing drugs drinking smoking and eating trash you can't be mentally healthy.

@ContentClipCentral 2 ай бұрын

@@kwinterskjw are you not a part of the collective "we all", as you stated in your first sentence? it's a good advice, don't get us wrong, but it doesn't answer our question.

@kwinterskjw 2 ай бұрын

@ContentClipCentral you clearly need help understanding generalization and exceptions. I'm not here to teach you. Go read a book.

@DruMusica 7 ай бұрын

Just a tip for the next ones: You shouldn’t have put the noise gate at 100%. With headphones, the total absence of background noise from the room creates cuts in the audio that sound unnatural.

@aidandoylepolitics 7 ай бұрын

Yeah it’s insanely annoying

@Dont_have_to_agree 7 ай бұрын

I’m not wearing Head Phones And can’t Even Listen.

@Mixdreamer 7 ай бұрын

Agreed insanely annoying

@JasonKutchma 7 ай бұрын

It's probably so it can be used as a podcast equivalent.

@joeking6972 7 ай бұрын

I thought the video was buffering haha

@f_c_k_o_f_f 8 ай бұрын

Matt keeps getting better at this. His communication skills are off the charts.

@paulthomas4917 8 ай бұрын

Yes matt is getting better, but Jordan is the teacher and matt is the fat kid in the class who is amusing without substance. I guess Jordan is the skeptic and matt is an atheist with a following of atheists, Jordan has a following of those from both sides, but importantly, aren't seeking confirmation bias. I do hope matt gets better as his mentor harris seems to have gone the way of nietzsche and I'm not sure harris has a mother to calm him.

@Aurealeus 8 ай бұрын

@@paulthomas4917 Silly !

@paulthomas4917 8 ай бұрын

@@Aurealeus No really matt is getting better I know what you mean by silly though, but that is just matts expresion, in another life he would have been a clown or maybe a ventriloquist dummy,

@Aurealeus 8 ай бұрын

@@paulthomas4917 No, you don't know what I mean. I meant your comment is silly.

@mathman43 8 ай бұрын

@@Aurealeus Dillahunty is a victim of weak/absent father syndrome. It's a familiar motif to many atheists.

@jonnyrode 2 ай бұрын

I think the first question 1:00:55 brings us back on topic to talk about God. The question is, basically, would God exist if human consciousness is removed. I interrupted the answer from Jordan to be, reality and God would disappear (to some degree). Would that mean that God isn't conscious? That God only exists in our human minds? This begs the question, how could God have created the world, then us if our consciousness creates the world? I suspect he thinks God is a construct of the human mind.

@thedemolitionmuniciple 2 ай бұрын

I wonder if I'd have to define "hi" "my" "name" and "is" to have a conversation with Peterson.

@RockSleeper 2 ай бұрын

"define "define"", he would ask. He seems to struggle understanding the meaning of most things, even the simplest of things.

@benyoung8427 2 ай бұрын

He would probably still tell you that you're wrong.

@S-tank_ 2 ай бұрын

It's just infuriating because jp is an atheist and just refuses to admit it because his fan base is mostly Christian conservatives and they would be furious. So he just goes into rambling word salads trying to skirt around giving a straightforward "no" when asked if he believes in God. At best it's disingenuous and at worst it's a flagrant abuse of his followers for personal gain

@ROSSI_27 2 ай бұрын

Just say you are dumb 🤦

@tomitiustritus6672 2 ай бұрын

The infuriating thing is not that he does that, but that he himself then avoids, dodges and refuses defining any of his terms.

@lewni25 5 ай бұрын

I love how much they used the ‘throwing Sam Harris off the stage’ analogy for the core of the argument/question 😂

@bloodybonescomic 5 ай бұрын

Yeah, that was enjoyable.

@NMSUNSETGOURMET 5 ай бұрын

If you throw the Deity off the stage all that remains is the word GOD.

@MichaelAronson 5 ай бұрын

@@NMSUNSETGOURMETYou can't throw deities. They don't exist.

@NMSUNSETGOURMET 5 ай бұрын

@@MichaelAronson Not throwing imagined Deities. Throwing the things that we subjectively define off the stage to see what can be objectively defined, by what we can measure with truth. When I say the word GOD exists, its meant in an absolute way, as it needs to exist for you to see it included in the sentence. The only thing left to measure when we accept the Deity sacrifice from the word GOD is the word GOD. When we choose to use it, we can see it. If we can see it, we can choose to give the picture that the word uses to build its objective property. To give the word requires we draw it, simple truth. Rather than place the imagined pillar of spaghetti, having no objective truth. That's why I've given the word GOD the definition that's seen without the Deity, for a division of time. The argument of subjective things is division, not Holy measured. The Sacrifice of the Deity value from GOD exchanges the subjective for the objective property. That being a claim requires I demonstrate that objective truth with GOD as a measure. So here it is again: Kneel to trace picture children. G is an incomplete whole with one square angle drawn in Earth. O is a whole measure. D is a split whole with two square angles drawn in Earth. Sacrificed, Holy measured. That is the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help me GOD.

@MichaelAronson 5 ай бұрын

@@NMSUNSETGOURMET Please learn English. This is so sad.

@RandolfRichardson 8 ай бұрын

Thanks for improving the audio on this one. It was a great conversation.

@NikolajHoelgaard 7 ай бұрын

A little hard cutoff on sentences sometimes. But better than usual 😁

@elbowstumblist Ай бұрын

I think Jordon could have argued better if he'd have sat up straight with his shoulders back

@user-bd6eo9wk9j Ай бұрын

And had not been sky high on speed

@jrojala Ай бұрын

Peterson appeared to be tweaking, uncomfortable, and defensive; he seemed to be unconsciously protecting his soft parts as much as possible with his hunched posture. Matt seemed comfortable and calm, his relaxed and open demeanor was a stark contrast to his opponent. It was over before it even started.

@user-bd6eo9wk9j Ай бұрын

@@jrojala JP's gotta chill out on the blow...

@jamesoconnor9452 5 күн бұрын

LOL this deserves way more likes.

@mrouimette 2 ай бұрын

This was so interesting thank you

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 18 күн бұрын

@courageousmelon5654 8 ай бұрын

Jordan Peterson is to religion as Deepak Chopra is to quantum physics.

@blabby102 8 ай бұрын

That's a perfect description of his debating style.

@noorzanayasmin7806 8 ай бұрын

We dont understand God as much and we do not understand quantum physic as well, so you are right

@blabby102 8 ай бұрын

@@noorzanayasmin7806 I think their comment went right over your head.

@GoodAvatar-ut5pq 8 ай бұрын

@@noorzanayasmin7806 And it always creates this problem... Which 'gawwwwd' are you talking about? If it's the Bible gawd, that gawd has a name and a description.

@noorzanayasmin7806 8 ай бұрын

@@blabby102 How so? Is it not true that we dont understand both concept well and trying to figure it out?

@MobiusVideo 3 ай бұрын

You should go easy on the noise reduction for the audio because at the moment it’s too aggressive and it sounds like there is something wrong with the audio the way it keeps ducking in and out.

@awkwardcapgun6131 3 ай бұрын

Idk if you heard the original audio debate back in 2018, but this is actually a HUGE improvement. Audio was trash, super quiet and still unbalanced.

@MobiusVideo 3 ай бұрын

@@awkwardcapgun6131 Sure, I’m not disputing that. But the fact remains that there are now many dead silent sections between the talking which is unnatural and unsettling. No noise is nearly as bad as too much noise. It’s really not that hard to get right. I’ve done this sort of thing a lot.

@stevenson720 2 ай бұрын

I'm glad you said the original was trash, I was annoyed about this audio until I heard that. Sound guy had an off night I guess.

@Xechor 2 ай бұрын

Definitely could use some adjustment on the compression, but I'm glad it's at least improved now.

@Maelthorn1337 2 ай бұрын

@@MobiusVideo I've always found it amusing how the majority of live recorded events like these tend to have poor audio production. This is far from the worst, but as a hobbyist broadcaster I feel I could set up and run the majority of these events way better and I'm no where near being an audio engineer.

@dave2848 22 күн бұрын

Back to point at 20min mark. Thanks Matt.

@stevenwrigley1110 3 ай бұрын

Matt Dillahunty is spot on here, especially with his comment on the common alien descriptors. Jordan Peterson has absolutely no idea what he's barbling on about here, the drugs nonsense he spouts is off the scale as it clearly shows he's never taken lsd, acid, salvia etc. Yes these experiences are profound, but they're not necessarily spiritual, religious or supernatural, unless you're daft enough to believe a dream about the bogeyman is too.

@Vplaytg 4 ай бұрын

Debate topic: Does god exist? JP: Lets make this about linguistics

@dooby1445 2 ай бұрын

Ok but how do you define linguistics????

@CustomFitted Ай бұрын

@@dooby1445 What do u mean by "define" exactly?

@familygrows7627 3 ай бұрын

Thank you for putting JP’s ego out on display for everyone to see. Not that it’s hard to do.

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 2 ай бұрын

@booboo4963 Ай бұрын

@therebelofchaos1674 27 күн бұрын

For the people who seem assmad about the way Jordan Peterson is debating: It's a philosophical debate. It ALWAYS is when it comes down to matters of a spiritual nature. And the reason that they bounced off of each other like this is because Matt tried to make it/understood the debate as a scholarly debate and JP understood it as a philosophical debate, which are two different things. I don't think either one "won" the debate, I feel they came more to an understanding of how each other thinks about spiritual matters.

@eddyeldridge7427 26 күн бұрын

When a person wants something that's not real to exist, they use philosophy to do so. Because philosophy can argue anything into or out of existence.

@MichaelAronson 26 күн бұрын

So Matt wanted to discuss things that actually exist and JP didn't.

@mm12122 2 ай бұрын

OPENING STATEMENT Fundamental presuppositions nested immovably in a metaphysical substrate in the domain of religious phenomology.

@rjjr7064 8 ай бұрын

If only presidential debates could be this civil

@JakeWitmer 8 ай бұрын

Or this intelligent

@weizenobstmusli8232 8 ай бұрын

Jordan Peterson: Mushrooms prove that there is a god. 5 minutes later: that's not what I am saying.

@SPQR_14 8 ай бұрын

That's not what he said...

@xenormxdraws 8 ай бұрын

@@SPQR_14 more like, "the supernatural exists because you can only stop smoking by taking mushrooms"

@SPQR_14 8 ай бұрын

@@xenormxdraws That's also not what he said... why can you people only rely on hyperbole and straw man? The crutch of the intellectually feeble.

@xenormxdraws 8 ай бұрын

remove the "only" from my comment and that is exactly what he meant@@SPQR_14

@SPQR_14 8 ай бұрын

@@xenormxdraws His point was that it is "real" enough to people to change their lives overnight where all other materialist methods, drugs, and treatments failed. But I know I'm wasting my time talking with a low IQ person who relies on snark and straw man as a crutch.

@The_Cannabis_Connoisseur 3 ай бұрын

I wish Jordan would stop calling tripping from mushrooms a "mystical experience"🤣🤣 The guy never did mushrooms but talks like he has!

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 2 ай бұрын

@RobC_Music Ай бұрын

I only know this because of doomscrolling YT shorts, and maybe it’s fake, but there are clips out there suggesting he’s taken macrodoses more than once.

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 Ай бұрын

@@RobC_Music Rob this order is most important All Humans need to repent & Believe in Jesus as their God. Why? Because all Humans have sinned (lied, lusted sexually, stolen, dishonoured parents, unbelief etc). Avoid the fires of Hell (justice of God) and choose Heaven today. Jesus defeated death by rising from the dead. GOD IS HOLY

@user-tp8ut7cs6j 15 күн бұрын

He's just trying to impress the young, Joe Rogan watching incel crowd.

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 7 күн бұрын

@@user-tp8ut7cs6j People often say, “I’m not hurting anyone so it’s ok to sin (lying, stealing, sexual sins, disrespecting parents etc)” The same God who said to love your neighbour first said to love Him to the best of your ability. If you carry on sinning, then you do not love God but are selfish like the devil so you will be joined to your father in hell or repent of your sins and believe in Jesus as God so Jesus adopts you as His child and you will join Him in Heaven forever.

@jonathanpabon4477 2 ай бұрын

I'm not gonna lie I'm an atheist and when I got high for the very first time (legally of course) I finally understood why ancient people believed in religion and took hallucinogenic drugs to speak with the gods. Because if I didn't know any better I would consider my experience not one of being high, but one of religous and spiritual awakening. Feeling things that I've never felt before under normal circumstances. So yeah it took me getting high to understand that if you're religious and get high you will see it as a religious and spiritual experience when in fact it's just your body and brain tripping out on drugs.

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 2 ай бұрын

@jonathanpabon4477 2 ай бұрын

@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 Bruh this literally does nothing. It might be powerful to you because you believe in it, but for everyone else you're just speaking nonsense. Literally Christianity breaks down if I prove to you that Jesus wasn't the only one in history who rose from the dead and as a god after he died. It was very common back in the day for powerful leaders and important figures to be humans and die then later become gods. Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar are a few who are humans and became gods after their death. Every single Egyptian Pharo was considered a living god. If you want to talk about humans dying and rising from the dead well Jesus isn't the only one in religion. The Egyptian god Osiris is believed to be an Egyptian human who lived 5,500-3,100 BCE who died and rose from the dead as a god. Dumuzid was a king of Bad-tibira (modern day Iraq) who basically had to spend half a year in the underworld and then coming back. Basically he would die and come back to life. In Greek mythology we have Adonis who was the human lover of the goddess Aphrodite who was killed by a wild boar and then Zeus brought Adonis back to life and gave him immortality. Attis was also a Greek human who died by killing himself and resurrected and became the god. Memnon, Alcmene, Heracles, and Melicertes all had died and risen from the dead. Jesus literally isn't the only one. Was he real yes Jesus definitely lived and died. We have proof of ancient historians describing Jesus as a teacher who pissed off the religious Jews for his beliefs. But he didn't come back to life rising from the dead. The Bible isn't 100% accurate there are parts that are true and historically accurate and there are parts that are completely false and there are parts in where it sounds as if the people writing it were high on drugs when they wrote it. You literally have to look and search outside of the Bible in order to prove and confirm that those events actually occurred and it wasn't all made up.

@jonathanpabon4477 2 ай бұрын

@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 Bruh if I can prove to you that Jesus never rose from the dead and everything was made up and that in other cultures there are humans who died and rose from the dead just like Jesus as well, would you stop believing in your religion? Because you saying all that doesn't change anything. It might be powerful to you because you believe in it, but it's literally nonsense for everyone else who doesn't.

@jonathanpabon4477 2 ай бұрын

@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 First of all do you even know God's true original name and where it originated from or even Jesus' original name and why it was changed? If you can answer that and be genuine about it without spilling any religious nonsense then I will take you seriously. There I gave you some homework to look up about your own religion that you probably didn't even know or considered to even find out.

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 Ай бұрын

@@jonathanpabon4477 God through the Holy Spirit has shown me several things relating to the afterlife with the purpose of convincing people like yourself. Stuff like Heaven and Hell, Angels, and evil Spirits the Lord Jesus (not worthy at all), a miracle happened to me that saved my life (thank you God) & so much more. I am more than happy to give further details.

@robertmontenegro5000 6 ай бұрын

Both of these gentlemen are such powerhouses. Even though they're both in disagreement, it's such a pleasure to listen to two enlightened gentlemen on opposite ends have a constructive argument. I don't agree with Jordan Peterson, but I'd still love to see more conversations with him and Matt.

@DaviniaHill 6 ай бұрын

Peterson is a simpleton.

@mxgggrmxgggr6232 6 ай бұрын

One enlightened gentleman my man .Peterson is just a meme

@gloriaf6971 6 ай бұрын

Peterson makes no sense.

@AtanuKDey 6 ай бұрын

@@gloriaf6971 Peterson makes no sense but boy oh boy does he produce word salad by the tons for the millions of his followers who love to eat it all up.

@seanday20 6 ай бұрын

@gloriaf6971 Peterson isn't an apologist, like James White or Jeff Durban, but he actually used their arguments. Not only that, Matt ended up defending Jesus' teaching 'do unto others as you want others to do to you'. That's when he was talking about morals. Matthew 19:17-19 & 22:36-40 Peterson is flawed but he's on the right path.

@AlexanderBrusilovsky 5 ай бұрын

Jordan is simply afraid not to believe in God. While Matt is not afraid to disbelive.

@gregarioussolitudinist5695 4 ай бұрын

It is not necessary to disbelieve something that does not exist. Nor is it important to hold a seance to prove it. Nor a polite debate. Why is it so important to devote a lifetime to deny something that you claim is not real? It makes his argument seem really silly.

@AlexanderBrusilovsky 4 ай бұрын

@@gregarioussolitudinist5695 I like it. You're addressing two aspects here: 1. Ensuring the nonexistence of "something." 2. Questioning the value of spending a lifetime debating such matters. Stating definitively that "something" doesn't exist isn't wise; it often involves a psychological loop of arguing the unprovable. Many fall victim to lifelong debates due to the magnitude and history of the subject, and Jordan is no exception. He struggles to theorize a singular conclusion, being human and susceptible to confusion, especially when navigating personal suffering rooted in his scientific attempt to challenge belief systems.

@nikolabajic4352 4 ай бұрын

You'd waste both of their time with this comment and you don't even have the humility to realise that

@AlexanderBrusilovsky 4 ай бұрын

@@nikolabajic4352 Excuse me, but who appointed you the authority on what these two represent? Lol. The last thing they require is a Karen crusading in their favor. Shame. 💥😆😆😆😆🙉🙉🙉🙈🙈🙈

@TorianTammas 4 ай бұрын

Peterson knows how much he sells to Christians as tgey maje up the largest part of buyers of his books and viewership. It is a simple cost benefit evaluation.

@michaelkupfer3723 2 ай бұрын

Peterson tried his usual bully-move (question what someone says, demand definitions, make them unsure, use that to your advantage) and fell apart when it didnt work on Matt. I wonder ehat the army of Peterson lovers think about that?

@Nick_LIFF 2 ай бұрын

As a Christian, unlike others, i actually do like and appreciate Matt and his assertions. This is going to sound dumb (both of these men dwarf my intelligence) but one thing comes to mind: skeptics are not grounded even in their own beliefs, definitionally, which means your own thoughts cant be trusted. The issue with this is, you cant really assert your point as a skeptic; you just argue against the other's point. Also, Matt's use of the word "progress" infers a preset standard to achieve. I think "change" or "adaptation" is the more fitting term. I'd assert that if there is no God or multiple gods, moral standards are subjective. Peterson can sometimes be daft, but he digs deep. Idk how people dislike or disrespect either of these minds.

@MichaelAronson 2 ай бұрын

"skeptics are not grounded even in their own beliefs, definitionally, which means your own thoughts cant be trusted." It means that skeptics don't have absolute certainty. Skeptics can have relative certainty, as all people do. We don't have absolute certainty that the sun will rise the following day, but we have relative certainty it will. "I'd assert that if there is no God or multiple gods, moral standards are subjective." This is correct, but it's also correct even if magical fairy men existed. Their moral standards would also be subjective.

@kellys923 5 ай бұрын

I wish all debates could go just like this one. I’m only half way through, but so far the back and forth is great. Doing it this way, each person has a chance to rebuttal each thing without some saying a gamut of things and then only have time to have an answer for a couple of questions and not having the time to answer the other 20 questions that one person has spit out to try a sway that one side. At the end of the day, one person asks a question and the other has there answer. Then the person that just answered the question now throws out there question for the other to answer, as a result way more questions get addressed 👍👍

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 4 ай бұрын

All Humans need to repent & Believe in Jesus as their God. Why? Because all Humans have sinned (lied, lusted sexually, stolen, dishonoured parents etc). Avoid the fires of Hell (justice of God) and choose Heaven today. Jesus defeated death by rising from the dead. GOD IS HOLY

@CaucasianLopez 4 ай бұрын

You have no idea the history of your religion do you.@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363

@joeythegoof5410 3 ай бұрын

@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363hell sounds fun

@brnm973 3 ай бұрын

@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 And Superman shoots lasers from his eyes, thats way cooler

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 3 ай бұрын

@@CaucasianLopez Peole do wrong things in the name of Christianity and they will be held accountable THE CHURCH IS FILLED WITH HYPOCRITES. it’s true the church is filled with Hypocrites; they are pretenders, not genuine Christians. The Bible speaks often of false converts sitting alongside those who are genuine in their faith (goats among the sheep, tares among the wheat, bad fish among the good fish, etc.), and assures us that God will sort them out on Judgment Day. Why let the pretenders keep you out of Heaven?

@nicolasandre9886 8 ай бұрын

"Consciousness is not just mysterious, it's like *really* mysterious" -Blue Raja- errr Dr Jordan Peterson.

@Im-not-alone-Im-full-of-myself 20 күн бұрын

- 💭 The speaker doesn't believe in a singular God and is open to discussing thoughts on the subject. - 🧠 They argue that the foundations of Western culture are deeply rooted in religious phenomenology. - 📚 They mention Dostoevsky, Carl Jung, and Eliade as influential figures in religious thought. - 🤔 Jordan question whether celebrity atheists address the real issues of religious belief. - 🔍 The speaker discusses the use of psychedelic drugs to induce mystical experiences and their impact on behavior. - 🍄 They argue that experiences induced by psychedelics can have profound effects on personality and behavior. - 🤔 The discussion revolves around the definition of the supernatural and how it relates to subjective experiences. - 🔍 They explore the difficulty of distinguishing between subjective experiences and objective reality. - 🌌 The speaker suggests that defining the supernatural narrowly may limit our understanding of different experiential realms. 👻 People who make claims about supernatural experiences often lack epistemologically sound confirmation. 🙏 The speaker was once a fundamentalist Southern Baptist who described experiences as religious but now sees them as similar to drug-induced euphoria or intense emotional experiences. 🎶 Music and specific rituals can evoke similar intense sensations as religious experiences. 🤔 The belief in supernatural beings often stems from a combination of hyperactive agency detection and pattern recognition. 🔍 Some psychological theories suggest that attributing experiences to the supernatural may stem from evolutionary tendencies to personify phenomena and detect agency. 🧠 Consciousness may be seen as confronting a landscape of possibility, shaping it into actuality through decision-making. 💡 The absence of a belief in a supernatural moral authority does not negate personal agency or moral responsibility. 💬 The discussion includes exploring different theories of religious beliefs' origins, including biological and psychological perspectives. 🔍 The discussion revolves around whether belief in a god is necessary for morality. 🤔 One participant argues that losing belief in a god would mean losing the metaphorical substrate of our ethos. 🤔 The metaphorical substrate refers to the broader context in which narratives are evaluated and believed. 📚 The discussion touches on levels of thought, including linguistic, emotional, and embodied aspects. 🗣 It's argued that belief is more than just thinking; it involves embodying and being convinced of a proposition's truth. 🎨 Art, poetry, drama, and narrative are considered part of the metaphorical landscape. 💡 Well-being is proposed as a basis for secular morality, though its definition is challenged. 💬 The conversation explores objections to the idea of well-being as a foundation for morality. 🤷‍♂ One participant questions why anyone should care about well-being and argues it's a subjective preference. 🤔 The discussion touches on starting points for defining well-being, including the preference for death over life and the avoidance of suffering. - 💬 Death vs. Life Debate: - Death may be preferable in certain instances over life. - However, when considering society's well-being, death is not generally preferable. - Life, health, and happiness are generally preferable but not absolute rules. - 💭 Skepticism and Moral Foundations: - Skepticism is necessary for evaluating moral claims. - Moral foundations can be revised based on evidence and societal goals. - 🤔 Secular vs. Religious Morality: - Secular morality allows for revision based on evidence. - Religious morality lacks the capacity for revision, leading to potential moral stagnation. - ♟ Analogy to Chess: - Moral systems are akin to a game of chess, with defined goals and actions evaluated based on their consequences. - Secular moral systems allow for adaptive strategies, similar to the approach of AI in learning to play chess. - 🧠 Rule-based Systems and AI: - Rule-based systems, including expert systems, have limitations. - Machine learning, as seen in AI, often outperforms rule-based systems by learning optimal strategies. - 🔍 Metaethics and Moral Reasoning: - There's a metaphysical basis underlying moral propositions. - Moral reasoning involves evaluating actions based on their consequences and alignment with societal goals. - 🔄 Revision and Adaptation: - Moral systems should be open to revision based on evidence and societal needs. - Religious systems' lack of revision can lead to moral rigidity and contradictions. - ❓ Audience Engagement: - Transitioning to audience questions to explore diverse perspectives further. - 🎤 The speaker emphasizes the importance of concise questions and shorter answers for an efficient Q&A session. - 🎤 Jordan Peterson reflects on the complex nature of consciousness and its relationship to the concept of God, highlighting the difficulty in answering hypothetical questions about God's existence without human consciousness. - 🎤 Matt discusses the role of religion as an archival system of truth and morality, contrasting it with the idea of individuals inventing their own morality. - 🎤 Matt argues that moral principles exist independently of religious beliefs, advocating for a secular understanding of morality and rejecting the notion that religion is necessary for ethical behavior. - 🎤 Peterson adds to the discussion by linking religious figures like Jesus to psychological archetypes and the evolution of moral values. - 🎤 Matt and an audience member debate whether secular humanism can be considered a form of religion, discussing the role of ideals and values in guiding human behavior. - 🎤 Peterson and the audience member explore the idea of God as a transcendent ideal or value guiding human actions, drawing on insights from psychology and philosophy. - 🎤 Matt clarifies his position on secular humanism, acknowledging its poetic and metaphorical aspects but rejecting the supernatural elements traditionally associated with deity. - 🎤 An audience member questions the adequacy of secular humanism compared to religious beliefs, prompting a discussion on the different roles fulfilled by religion and secular values. - 🎤 Matt responds, advocating for secular humanism as a rational and moral framework, while acknowledging that it may not encompass all aspects traditionally attributed to religious beliefs. - 💬 Religious language is complex and abstract, focusing on moral imperatives and the nature of being. - 💡 Religious propositions serve as generalizations about existence and guide behavior. - 📚 The religious landscape includes the known (explored territory) and the unknown (unexplored territory), symbolized by order and chaos respectively. - 🧠 Religious language is deeply ingrained in human psychology, with the right hemisphere processing chaos and the left hemisphere processing order. - 🌟 Pursuing meaning is central in religious language, balancing between the known and the unknown. - 🐉 Religious language often communicates grandeur and deep existential truths, exemplified by mythological figures like Saint George or Christ. - 🤔 There's a distinction between professed atheism and genuine atheism, with the latter exemplified by characters like Raskolnikov in "Crime and Punishment." - 📖 Raskolnikov's narrative illustrates the danger of rationality divorced from moral and metaphorical frameworks, leading to post-traumatic unraveling. - 🤝 Atheism is simply a lack of belief in gods, not necessarily a lack of morality or purpose. - 🕊 Atheists can hold various beliefs and interpretations, such as cultural Christianity or admiration for religious teachings without belief in the supernatural. - 🗣 Atheists often face challenges from religious perspectives that question their sincerity or morality, perpetuating stereotypes and biases. 🗣 Religious Misconceptions: - The mindset about atheists has been poisoned by religious proclamations. - Atheists have been denigrated from the pulpit and this mindset has seeped into every aspect of culture. - It's time to end these misconceptions. 🤔 Morality and Evolution: - Evolutionary underpinnings contribute to morality. - Morality is an emergent property of group interactions, seen in animals as well. - Morality is inherently selfish and beneficial for individuals. 📚 References: - Carl Jung's idea of the God image in human beings is distinct from the existence of a deity. - Intense mystical experiences of a deity don't necessarily prove the existence of one. - The religious instinct might be deeply ingrained in humans. 📖 Books and Complexity: - Explaining these ideas in detail requires a substantial amount of material, as seen in Peterson's 600-page book. - A simpler way to convey these ideas hasn't been found yet. 🍓 LSD Experience: - Despite intense psychedelic experiences, like seeing a "super strawberry," they don't necessarily point to reality. - Personal anecdotes don't serve as proof for broader arguments. 👏 Conclusion and Remarks: - Discussions like these are important, and it's encouraging that there's an avid public audience for them. - Appreciation for the audience's engagement and interest in such topics.

@reggaefromzion 2 ай бұрын

Saying that someone believes something is not equivalent to the proposition being true. When Dillahunty says that we care for well-being because we come from ancestry that does, his statement is a meta proposition about the proposition "we should care about well-being". From the fact that people think this way, we cannot derive that people should do so. We can agree about all facts, but oughts are non - sequiturs to them. If we are having moral propositions you need an arbitrary set of moral axioms. Those constitute your metaphysics

@jonathanstrouse4161 7 ай бұрын

This is awesome. This kind of civil arguments and putting it on the table is so civil and gentlemen like is amazing

@jackjones2381 7 ай бұрын

I really like listening to such a good debate, leaving out what one thinks what right or wrong the talent of the debate is fantastic 👍

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 2 ай бұрын

@MalkuthEmperor 2 ай бұрын

1:09:07 you cant have God be your foundation if God is also based on other presupositions which have to be proven And here im talking about the idea of god, like Peterson is And what god is based on is human perception and nature So if anything, nature is the basis for our morality Or our our perceptions God is the thing that justifies morality in jordans view, but he forgets to ask what justifies god

@kevinparrino2371 9 күн бұрын

"though I walk through the valley of shadow and death I will fear no evil, for thou art with me. thy rod and thy staff comfort me." you dont need shrooms Jordan Peterson. just pray. he will answer!

@DeusKDuo 6 ай бұрын

This is how a debate should be. You can still have common ground while being on opposite sides. Most debates seem to be about destroying the person who opposes you pretending as if there is no value to anything they have to say.

@godcorrodedgod 6 ай бұрын

I dont precive this conversation as a debate. Thats why it is so learning and positiv to listen to.

@julianmanjarres1998 5 ай бұрын

They're not even on opposite sides.. Peterson isn't a Christian per se

@brandondill5640 5 ай бұрын

There was no debate here whatsoever. JBP simply does not allow for it.

@hijodelayoka 5 ай бұрын

This is a debate, its just, we are accostumed to what politics do in debates

@theQuestion626 5 ай бұрын

@@brandondill5640 but Peterson doesn’t really know how to debate. I’ve watched him in the past and I’ve watched him on interviews. He has these tired rhetorical tricks that he employs where he makes sweeping generalizations, bold claims and doesn’t present any evidence to support his arguments. He rambles with a lot of academic jargon and talks and talks in order to avoid being pressed to provide proof. He also engages in a lot of epistemological games in order to further muddy the waters and confuse his opponent. And he also does this so that he can do that little giggle of his and say “I didn’t say that.” The joke being here that he doesn’t really ever say much of anything of relevance or validity. Also Peterson seems to take every form of interaction as some form of competition that he must dominate. Dillahunty is treating it as this is, a conversation. Peterson is walking up as if this is a fight to be won. His smug “Ready to go?” when Matt welcomes him onstage was a clear giveaway.

@johndogwater 8 ай бұрын

I do wish Jordan would let people finish their points.

@fgoindarkg 8 ай бұрын

The penchant of the narcissist. It's involuntary.

@Hollyucinogen 8 ай бұрын

@@fgoindarkgI think he's a narcissist, too. Nobody in my country (Canada) gives him a second thought. 🤨

@andrewsmith3257 8 ай бұрын

@@fgoindarkgthank you! I used to kinda like Peterson but he's gone off the rails years ago. All his arguments boil down "we need God because societeh"

@JaTjr32 3 ай бұрын

Matt has been debating everyone for years. This is breakfast for him. He's unflappable.

@SpiderMan-od3kr 2 ай бұрын

I did enjoy listening to the civilized academic debate. It's interesting to hear the way that the arguments are made and dissected.

@GuitarDiddlerJP15 8 ай бұрын

I feel that the crowds presence and reactions to their discussion was counter productive in this situation. I would have liked to see them debate/discuss in a one on one setting. Their laughs were misplaced and creates the wrong perception of what they were saying to each other

@XanderShiller 8 ай бұрын

I think JPs debates with Sam Harris were intellectual blockbusters. You could feel the aggression via audio. This was a drunken convo but easy going and I'm glad Jordan is chilling. Good to see him laugh

@FilDoyon 7 ай бұрын

I'm not so sure about that. I think this debate is worth listening and many people should listen to that. I think the public and their reactions add to the funny part of it and it will be easier for many people to listen to that simply because of that. And they were interacting with the public. I think it might be good

@GuitarDiddlerJP15 7 ай бұрын

@@FilDoyon I agree with almost everything you said, but I feel that it amplified the argumentative state of this debate. What seemed like pretty standard answers from Jordan changed into more aggressive sounding statements because of the crowds misplaced laughs and reactions. I don't think he was trying to be that way much of the time but the crowds perception and reaction made it seem like his responses were more argumentative than he intended and it changed the dynamic of the conversation. I agree with the benefits you stated though.

@FilDoyon 7 ай бұрын

@@GuitarDiddlerJP15 fair enough. I think you're right. But what I'm not sure about is the fact that it is wrong. Indeed, it might have changed a little bit the perception of Jordan's arguments, but when you know Jordan, you know that it was not his intention, like you've said, and if you don't know him, even if it might have sounded a bit more aggressive than the reality, Jordan's reactions to Matt answers throughout that part of the debate was so funny that I don't think it will depict him as someone's interrupting or being too much aggressive. "I might be wrong, but I don't think so" 😋🤣 hahaha

@danvalare 7 ай бұрын

100%, and the ones that say no are the ones whoe will be laughing and clapping with every dull statement. Sorry.

@franzseidel7891 4 ай бұрын

Great debate. I hope Jordan and Matt do it again.

@drwzer 4 ай бұрын

Matt has already said that Peterson, after initially agreeing to another talk, he now refuses to do it on advice of his manager. Apparently the manager thought Matt was too effective at debunking Jordan’s arguments.

@bauist 3 ай бұрын

It confirms that Peterson is a narcissist. Not sure what’s so ‘great’ about a whiny theist who won’t admit it trying to keep up with a well informed humble nuanced gentleman. JP had his 15 min of fame - now he’s just a tired apologist like hundreds of others. He likes to fancify his speech by using what Dan Dennett called ‘deepity.’

@brownsterring9259 3 ай бұрын

I still prefer the 403 / whatever debates where everyone talks over each other before rage quitting

@TechNeil11 3 ай бұрын

Can you do Sam Mat and Jordan 😂😂😂

@ayotundeayoko5861 3 ай бұрын

Sir, with due respect, I am damn sure Mr. Peterson won't want to do another debate with Matt.

@guidodurante9495 2 ай бұрын

1:27:27 "PTSD very often occurs in people who watch themselves do something of great malevolence". Maybe in a warmongering country that's "very often" the case, because of all the soldiers, but PTSD can occur in victims just as much. Also, there's a lot of soldiers who did not commit "acts of great malevolence", but they witnessed them first hand, being done to peers or enemies alike, and that also results in PTSD. It's much more complex than "There's an objective morality dictated by a magical being outside our plane of existence that affects us and if we suffer is because we broke that intrinsic rule of the Universe".

@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 11 күн бұрын

@vascoa 2 ай бұрын

Damn.. Jordan is difficult to speak to, when he doesn't have or like the answer he dances around.. Also his definition of god throughout the discussion is not that it is supernatural, but that it is constructed in each person's mind. He just baby l can't take the step to lay it out.

@user-tp8ut7cs6j 15 күн бұрын

He's afraid that if he admits that he only believes that God is a metaphor, he will lose his audience. He's also afraid that if he were actually concise and to the point about his ideas, people would realize that he's full of s#!t.

@ErinWilke 3 ай бұрын

Jordan Peterson calling atheists not atheists was like an Uno reverse "No True Scotsman"

@jestes7 3 ай бұрын

What do you mean by uno reverse? I'm not sure I understand that part. If that part were left out of the sentence, I agree.

@SleepyMatt-zzz 3 ай бұрын

The "atheists are not atheists" argument is so old and dishonest. I'm surprised that Christian theists continue to use it.

@lukedegraaf1186 3 ай бұрын

@jestes7 it's a card game.

@jestes7 3 ай бұрын

@@lukedegraaf1186 Uno reverse isn't a card game. Uno is. Reverse is a card in that game. People use the term uno reverse to mean comeback. Which doesn't make sense here. Using a fallacy as a "comeback" isn't a comeback at all.

@vampirgirl41 3 ай бұрын

@@jestes7I get why you're confused, but you're too hung up on the mechanics of the actual uno reverse card. He's using it as a rhetoric device to make fun of how Peterson makes an absolutely unreasonable argument by shifting the goalpost. He changed the definition of what an atheist is by saying that through our morals we all unconsciously believe in God or something like that. It's like a kid that says "No, you" to a certain extent. Imagine you tell someone you don't believe in God and he says "Yes, you do because you believe killing people is bad". You could also use a YuGi Oh reference, saying that the mirrored his ass. There's sarcasm involved. From Peterson's perspective he believes to understand something deeper about the concept of God, but to anyone, who can somewhat think critically, he's asspulling stuff in a fashion of a uno reverse card, in an outrageous way, which makes me laugh xD

@THEInfamousRAY 7 ай бұрын

Albert Einstein said "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough" ......... Is what I would tell Jordan Peterson! At times I felt like I understood and at times I was just lost in his vocabulary! It was always so refreshing when Matt would speak, he was clear and coherent, and he used great examples and analogies to support his perspective! In my opinion Jordan can learn alot from Matt in terms of the way he explains himself.

@rickymitchelmore9102 7 ай бұрын

I know exactly what you mean, which is more than i can say for Jordan Peterson.

@MichaelAronson 7 ай бұрын

Never forget this is the guy whose "12 Rules for Life" included the rule to *_be precise in your speech._*

@THEInfamousRAY 7 ай бұрын

@@MichaelAronsonthe irony! 😅

@ronaldrrootiii6040 6 ай бұрын

Yeah Jordan Peterson honestly seems like he was full of crap but he knows he's gained a lot of Christian followers so he wants to sound smart and not go against what I think his intellect nose is true about the lack of evidence for a god. It's almost kind of annoying because you see him pause and then just start saying a bunch of weird words in a row as if they are valid. He's very opening thing saying that it's not taken serious biologically intellectually all this stuff what is he talking about? It's not taken serious the fact of considering if there's a God that's the stupidest opening line ever of course it's taken serious it's taken way more serious by atheist than this by any religious

@martelljhixson 6 ай бұрын

The man was perfectly coherent to me. Although I’m the type of person that learns new words for fun. I’ll summarize what I heard in simple terms: 1. The concept of God seems to be a result of biological and cultural development. It developed as a necessary means for our ability to communicate and to move beyond pragmatism. 2. Matt’s view is simple pragmatism on the back of the work that faith has constructed. Pragmatism does not give you the power to dream and to enter into danger, chaos, or the unknown. There is no good reason to do so unless forced by a greater foundational narrative. 3. Values are shaped in our intuition to believe in God and purpose. It is the majority of people’s innate operating systems. It explains why we should value ourselves and others. 4. Without God we can only have facts and opinions but not truth. Truth is necessary for the formation of society. 5. The functional benefit of God and its universal metaphysical power can serve as a type of evidence for its reality. For example…we conceive of circles so much so that we intuitively make use of them. To argue about if they are a thing in reality is silly. We conceive them therefore the question is irrelevant. 6. Atheism have no unifying narrative to challenge the evil that seems to be innate in all of us. At best it can give us pragmatism but not moral duties…this seems to him to be possible evidence that we know God is real in some sort. Those were a few of his points. There were a lot more. Matt was arguing that you can’t prove God exist beyond the shadow of doubt to call it objective truth. But Jordan seemed to be arguing that is irrelevant because you can’t live functionally without the concept. Matt was getting angry when Jordan was trying to highlight that when he presented his working system for human wellbeing. I tend to agree with Jordan. Matt himself acknowledged that the work of thinking through a grounded functional worldview and value system…most would never do it. They will default to superstition or being told what to believe. That system needs to create empathy and creativity and boldness while restraining human “evil” in a potent way. That’s what religion does…atheism does not have the capacity to do that. We all know you can’t prove God in any absolute sense. But most people aren’t interested establishing anything in an absolute sense because most things we assume can’t be proven…for the theists and atheists alike.

@BrianRPaterson 2 ай бұрын

Peterson lost me with his smoking comment. I quit smoking cold turkey -- no drugs and no mystical experience. I did the same with alcohol a little later, and 30 years on I'm still smoke free and tea-total. The thing you really need is a strong personal desire to quit. But supernatural support is not necessary.

@Crashawsome 2 ай бұрын

I quit on a Friday after spending 4 hours listening to an Allen Carr CD on the bus to work that week. That was 10 years ago.

@Im-not-alone-Im-full-of-myself 20 күн бұрын

Peterson's smoking comment was so ridiculous😂

@BrianRPaterson 19 күн бұрын

@@Im-not-alone-Im-full-of-myself It sums up the man entirely -- a blowhard with plenty of knowledge, no common sense.