Jordan Peterson interview on C4

20Cent

Kassidy Savory Tick wrote: »

We're seeing it already — the new theology is fanatical political correctness. Its adherents present themselves as the only ones who are enlightened (or "woke"). They have a grand "good vs evil" narrative, their own set of sacred scriptures (Butler, Žižek, etc), their armies of offline and online evangelists, and numerous heretics who must be rooted out, subjected to their inquisition, and burnt at the stake (especially Jordan Peterson, TERFs, Christians). They even have transubstantiation, where adherents must accept that a male can become a female and vice versa.

This is the new religion.

Is this the biggest over reaction to a comment ever?

They call SJW's snowflakes :rolleyes:

buried

Kassidy Savory Tick wrote: »

I'm hopelessly limited in my understanding of Eastern religions, although I've read a few of Alan Watts' books and found them very inspirational. My main touchstone for this kind of thinking is (you will laugh) George Lucas's use of Eastern philosophies in Star Wars — the light and the dark side of the Force, and the need to keep them in balance, while understanding that both the light and the dark will always be there. We can't eliminate evil, and we can't eliminate good, either. Both are always within us. It takes bravery to acknowledge that — which is why I think the people who are mocking Peterson for his depression, his addiction, etc., are entirely missing the point. Life is not always a happy place. We will have ups and downs, good times and bad times, times when everything comes easily to us and times when we struggle. That's the human condition and we have to accept that.

That's mighty, I love Alan Watt's too, this site here https://www.alanwatts.org/ has loads of his lectures on record here you can buy and listen to! This is my nightly go to sauce for relaxation before sleep! Old 'Manly P Hall' lectures on youtube too are a great resource for the discussion of the old and new religions, well worth checking out too! "The Tibetan Book of The Dead" is a fine book to start off checking out the Eastern philosophy aspect also! Yeah, I get the whole Star Wars mythos of the original three, that's what gave them their particular magic and so wildly popular too IMO

Gynoid

buried wrote: »

To me, the religions of the far east, have a far greater role to play in the advancement of the human condition. At least they acknowledge to a greater degree the fact that there is need for both the darkness/chaos to co-exist alongside the light/good/peace. The need for balance in the human mindset. The Judeo/Christian religions of the near east, especially Christianity and Islam have lost that balance .

The far eastern religions did have a greater role to play on the advancement of the human condition...in the far east. The moderating influence of most religions that have evolved beyond barbarism have been good for shaping human instincts into chosen behaviours or self discipline, which is beneficial to communal society on the whole.
On the other point re darkness/chaos, it is there in the Christian philosophy I think, but one can argue against my ideas on it. In all religions there are schools of what might be called monism and dualism, to simplify it (too much). So evil and good exist as two distinct oposing forces or as coexisting forces within the one - these 2 views are in all traditions. An extreme Christian rooted example of dualism would be Gnosticism or Manichaeism. In more mainstream Christian thought evil is seen as an absence of good rather than an independent force, but really the same idea can underpin many schools of philosophy in the east too.
Like you I would have put eastern thought on a higher level than western, but over time I see them as equally interesting. It us just that the political forces of Christianity have been to the fore for centuries rather than the philosophical.

Christian thought owes a lot of its antecedence to Greek pagan thought, eg Augustine and Aquinas were highly influenced by neoplatonists like Plotinus, and back further to Aristotle and Plato themselves. There is a good argument to be made for the eastern influence on Greek philosophy. Really interesting more speculative stuff also re Pythagorus and the eastern thread. And then the earlier hotbed of Alexandria where so much thought from disparate regions of the world freely mixed, changed, developed and spread in all directions to have their undoubtedly civilising influences. It is a huge topic - really the story of humanity - and not simple.

nkl12xtw5goz70

buried wrote: »

That's mighty, I love Alan Watt's too, this site here https://www.alanwatts.org/ has loads of his lectures on record here you can buy and listen to! This is my nightly go to sauce for relaxation before sleep! Old 'Manly P Hall' lectures on youtube too are a great resource for the discussion of the old and new religions, well worth checking out too! "The Tibetan Book of The Dead" is a fine book to start off checking out the Eastern philosophy aspect also! Yeah, I get the whole Star Wars mythos of the original three, that's what gave them their particular magic and so wildly popular too IMO

Thank you! I'll check out Watts's lectures, Manly P. Hall, and the Tibetan Book of the Dead. Great references! Interestingly, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance by Robert Pirsig is on Peterson's "great books" list as well.

ILoveYourVibes

Gynoid wrote: »

There is a good argument to be made for the eastern influence on Greek philosophy.

I wouldn't have thought so.

They are totally incompatible and oppose each other.

They encountered Egyptian mathematicians. But no contact beyond that. And Egypt wasn't great for philosophy.

Gynoid

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

They encountered Egyptian mathematicians. But no contact beyond that. And Egypt wasn't great for philosophy.

Alexandria in Egypt was the major centre of the Hellenistic (Greek) empire for hundreds of years. Key google words include Alexander the Great (the Greek founder of Alexandria) and Ptolemaic empire.

ILoveYourVibes

Gynoid wrote: »

Alexandria in Egypt was the major centre of the Hellenistic (Greek) empire for hundreds of years. Key google words include Alexander the Great (the Greek founder of Alexandria) and Ptolemaic empire.

Yeah i kind of know that.

I have a degree in philosophy. Its likely Greek philosophy influenced Egypt more than the opposite though. And Egyptian math influenced Greece.

It was also home to the largest Jewish community in the world at the time.

It was the center of hellenism. The Septuagint (first greek Tanakh) was produced there.

Western philosophy and Eastern philosophy are at odds with each other. There is very little of one in the other.

Buddhist philosophy or Hindhu philosophy is very independent of it. Their concept of time and identity is very different.

Gynoid

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Yeah i kind of know that.

I have a degree in philosophy. Its likely Greek philosophy influenced Egypt more than the opposite though. And Egyptian math influenced Greece.

It was also home to the largest Jewish community in the world at the time.

It was the center of hellenism. The Septuagint (first greek Tanakh) was produced there.

Western philosophy and Eastern philosophy are at odds with each other. There is very little of one in the other.

Buddhist philosophy or Hindhu philosophy is very independent of it. Their concept of time and identity is very different.

You said no contact beyond maths. That was wholly incorrect. Only a limited understanding of older philosophies would describe different ones as completely at odds. They are none of them monolithic, and there is much that is comparable.

ILoveYourVibes

Gynoid wrote: »

You said no contact beyond maths. That was wholly incorrect. Only a limited understanding of older philosophies would describe different ones as completely at odds. They are none of them monolithic, and there is much that is comparable.

I would totally disagree. There is little that is comparable.

Even indian logic is different. Which is baffling ..i mean its logic! Logically it should be the same!

I think there main system of logic is Naya sutra they apparently use circles to prove a and not a. don't ask me to explain it!

The circles are the catuskoti ...teralemma

Buddhist logic /Indian logic seems VERY different from Western logic. It actually seems way more complex and difficult to understand.

It states to X ( a proposition ) there are FOUR possibilities.


Indian logic is very paraconsistent. I wouldn't describe Western logic that way at all. Actually western logic isn't good at dealing with inconsistencies.

Paraconsistent logic is very common in Indian logic i mean the root of it. I would say western logic traditionally is more classical.

ILoveYourVibes

I don't pretend to understand indian metaphysics etc or indian logic ...it just seems way more complex i dont know if there is anything else like indian logic on this earth tbh.

Also indian logic focuses more on inference ..westerm logic is more about deduction.

Gynoid

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I don't pretend to understand indian metaphysics etc or indian logic ...it just seems way more complex i dont know if there is anything else like indian logic on this earth tbh.

Also indian logic focuses more on inference ..westerm logic is more about deduction.

If you are interested as casual examples..

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoplatonism

https://www.academia.edu/247838/The_Roots_of_Platonism_and_Vedanta

Humans from disparate parts of the planet have been profitably exchanging ideas and influences for a very very long time.

nkl12xtw5goz70

Brian? wrote: »

That's bleak.

You think it's "bleak" that darkness, destruction, and the lust for power will always be a part of human nature?

That's just the human condition, as Peterson and many others accept it to be. The perfectability of human nature is a dangerous illusion. Righteousness itself can quickly turn into destructive totalitarianism, as Milton showed in Paradise Lost 200 years before Marx published Capital.

ILoveYourVibes

Gynoid wrote: »

If you are interested as casual examples..

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoplatonism

https://www.academia.edu/247838/The_Roots_of_Platonism_and_Vedanta

Humans from disparate parts of the planet have been profitably exchanging ideas and influences for a very very long time.

The first would support my own views.

Muslims scholars preserved the texts of many Greek philosophers in the middle ages. Its agreed they didn't really influence them though.

For an obvious reason Plato was long dead. Similarly they preserved Aristotle's books. Physics , Metaphysics etc.

I dont see your examples as supporting your point at all. Quite the contrary.

Plato would say for example sense experience induction is possible. Something vedanta would deny.

The platonic and vedantic view of reality is very very different. I don't think they can be reconciled.

ILoveYourVibes

TBH western philosophy remained largley sealed off from Eastern Philosophy and visa versa there are reasons for this.

The Greek tradition, recovered in Christian Europe after the rupture of the dark ages, combined with the Judeo-Christian tradition to form the western philosophical inheritance. Medieval Islamic thought sustained the Greek inheritance, but the turning away from Greek categories to concentrate on the Koran is part of the reason it would now be strange to consider Islamic philosophy part of the western tradition.


There is largely mutual ignorance between them. For example several eastern ideas would have solved a lot of western concepts but western philosophers remain ignorant to them.

Neo platonism is a modern term ...not even a medieval one.

Any comparisons are done in modern times.


The west east divide extends to political philosophy,to political individualism.

The west is more individualist.

I wouldn't have said the Greeks influenced Indian philosophy either.

If you study philosophy in Europe you dont study Eastern Philosophy. And the same Indian Universities they don't really study european philosophy.

In fact in India European philosophy is looked down upon.

ILoveYourVibes

Torino wrote: »

It is amusing how some people after man decades on this planet still do not understand human nature.

Why would they? Its always changing?


A man's nature in medieval europe in comparison to now would be much different.

Diet affected his physiology. He would have a different idea of the world.

Even the language you grow up speaking affects you and how you see the world.

I have issues understanding the nature of people in my own country they are so different to me.

No one understands each other.

El_Duderino 09

Gynoid wrote: »

You have me mixed up for someone else, chief re the institutions of government.
I'm not eager to be crediting, I am just relaying the historical facts, it has nothing to do with me personally or my inclinations, it is just factual. .And if you could tell me what other force or influence was facilitating architecture, philosophy, science, literacy etc etc for the past many centuries to a comparable degree in Europe that would be great. There have been other important forces but none so dominant or enduring I think. Overall we are the better for it on a macro level.
So I won't have to tire out me fingers typing after a long day, I will leave you this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role_of_Christianity_in_civilization

Yes I mistook you for another poster on the government institutions.

Hut there's no way you're going to credit Christianity for all the "architecture, philosophy, science, literacy etc etc" for the past many centuries. Talk about giving Christianity a freebie. You'd swear nobody had an original thought for 2000 years that can t be credited to Christianity. That's not fact though, is it?

ILoveYourVibes

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Yes I mistook you fur another poster on the government institutions.

Hut there's no way you're going to credit Christianity for all the "architecture, philosophy, science, literacy etc etc" for the past many centuries. Talk about giving Christianity a freebie. You'd swear nobody had an original thought for 2000 years that can t be credited to Christianity. That's not fact though, is it?

I would credit architecture to architects. etc etc

ILoveYourVibes

I think i am the WORST person for understanding human nature.

I truly believe that.

And i really don't think most people unless you know me well understand my nature at all.

ILoveYourVibes

Torino wrote: »

The fundamentals of human nature are the same, they are timeless.

Why?

Dogs birds etc change over time?

A wild dog has a different nature to a domesticated one.

A jack russell has a different nature to a lab.

Different language can give you different natures.

For example chinese people can point North or south east or west accurately no matter which way they are facing no matter what. Because their language doesn't use left or right. It uses ns or ew and doing this over and over gives them this ability.

Personality psychology i think was Peterson's area no? Not sure.

children brought up in diff backgrounds can have diff natures.

One person brought up in adversity will come out ok. Another won't.

I dont think human nature is the same at all.

People with aspergers...etc we are all BEAUTIFUL SNOWFLAKES! :pac:

ILoveYourVibes

Torino wrote: »

There are variations amongst people, bit commonalities persist. The framers of the US constitution for example were quite adept at seeing the persistent themes of human nature.

You may think you are a unique snowflake, however countless people have have similar personalities to yourself.

I would suggest reading "The Laws of Human Nature" by at Robert Green.

Why what is the point?

My personality according to eastern philosophy doesn't even exist.

According to eastern philosophy i am a diff person from moment to moment.

ILoveYourVibes

Torino wrote: »

Human nature is basically the same on a fundamental level. This doesn't mean every single person is the same. People can be very different, but human nature is the same throughout time, the same patterns and themes persist.

What themes and patterns?

What is a nature?

You mean its genetically encoded?

What gives us this nature?

Childhood? Genes?

ILoveYourVibes

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Why would they? Its always changing?


A man's nature in medieval europe in comparison to now would be much different.

Diet affected his physiology. He would have a different idea of the world.

Even the language you grow up speaking affects you and how you see the world.

I have issues understanding the nature of people in my own country they are so different to me.

No one understands each other.

I just read a book that kind of made this point.. that medieval man would have interacted with reality in a much different way than we do today.. They were looking back at the development of language, thinking it would have begun as more utilitarian, and become more metaphorical, but that didn't seem to be the case..it looks like language began as more metaphorical and became more utilitarian over time.. it kind of pointed to the relationship between the self and the external world becoming more detached over time..

ILoveYourVibes

Torino wrote: »

Your personality is common and predictable just like everyone else's. Read the book I mentioned and you will understand human nature better.

I will understand human nature from a book? I find that doubtful.

I think i would understand human nature better if i learnt to speak more languages.

buried

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I will understand human nature from a book? I find that doubtful.

I think i would understand human nature better if i learnt to speak more languages.

History is the best subject to study in order to learn more about human nature.
Its an actual perfect litmus test.

ILoveYourVibes

Deleted User wrote: »

I just read a book that kind of made this point.. that medieval man would have interacted with reality in a much different way than we do today.. They were looking back at the development of language, thinking it would have begun as more utilitarian, and become more metaphorical, but that didn't seem to be the case..it looks like language began as more metaphorical and became more utilitarian over time.. it kind of pointed to the relationship between the self and the external world becoming more detached over time..

I think medieval man would have a hard time fitting in to today's world


I saw a documentary about a girl from the rainforest who married a white american. She had to go back ...she said living in the west was taking a toll on her mental health she was always anxious etc. She felt she was going mad. She couldn't get the mentality.

ILoveYourVibes

buried wrote: »

History is the best subject to study in order to learn more about human nature.
Its an actual perfect litmus test.

Maybe.

The way its presented it kind of makes the psychology of the people behind the events hard to discern etc.

ILoveYourVibes

Torino wrote: »

Do you not think you can learn from people who dedicate their lives to understanding human nature and history?

I am not so certain. No.

Many a group of people together. Not one person.

buried

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Maybe.

The way its presented it kind of makes the psychology of the people behind the events hard to discern etc.

How do you mean? Not being a wisearse now, but is it because its all having to remember various dates or anything like that? I know that can put some people off the subject of History, but at it's basic heart, History is basically stories, but there is fact, data and evidence behind the stories which makes the subject just so interesting and enjoyable.
And there is so much of it to learn, the way of the human condition that makes it so rewarding.

nkl12xtw5goz70

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I will understand human nature from a book? I find that doubtful.

Read the complete works of Shakespeare, Milton's Paradise Lost, and Melville's Moby-Dick. That will give you a pretty good understanding of human nature.

Brian?

Torino wrote: »

I think it has been useful, it has proffered the delusion which allows people to keep going and working to keep society moving forward.

I don’t understand your answer. You think it’s still useful?