On Confronting
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 6 ก.ย. 2024
- 📺 Watch Full Episode on LOCALS: mattfradd.loca...
🙏 Try Hallow: mattfradd.loca...
Matt Fradd asks Jordan Peterson about his interview with Destiny. Peterson admits it's the podcast he had "the most qualms" about. Find out why.
DISCLAIMER: Nothing in this video is meant as medical advice
🟣 Join Us on Locals (before we get banned on YT): mattfradd.loca...
🖥️ Website: pintswithaquin...
🟢 Rumble: rumble.com/c/p...
👕 Merch: shop.pintswith...
🔵 Facebook: / mattfradd
📸 Instagram: / mattfradd
We get a small kick back from affiliate links.
I thought the Destiny convo was one of the best on his channel tbh
Yeah me too... but its easier for JP to just write it off as a "he only cares about being right"
@@firefly9838 He's not wrong. Destiny has desired conclusions that fit his narrative on his mind and he talks, walks and lives towards those conclusions. He's not gonna mention anything on his channel about Biden not being able to put sentences together properly or the bizarre situation of the border, or the inappropriate books in the schools intended to brainwash minors, etc. etc. for a reason and whoever brings them up is gonna get a 5-minute raging rant on how those issues are not important and that everyone's just a conspiracy theorist. Also if you talk about his personality or his lifestyle you're just gonna be called "obsessed".
Destiny is a two-faced liar. He'll lie about anything to be right and has done so many, many times. He'll change his theories or opinions on a whim to be right as well. When Destiny goes on with these legitimate thinkers that really care about the things they think about, he's pretending to be one of them. When he goes back to his own channel, he will make fun of them incessantly or throw them under the bus immediately. He's a snake and always has been.
that video on JBP is sitting at 3.7M Views, highest video JBP has made recently, in what like 4-5 months?
I actually have a theory why so many people are in a social media echo chamber and maybe some people just don't know about some of the stuff. on social media your given recommendations based on what you veiw including TH-cam. I usually reset my recommendations every now and then so I can some times see stuff new and I don't really just mean political stuff just in general Destiny is right on very few things not all that often same with a lot of liberals it might be because they just don't have recommendations to some of the kind of information maybe I mean I seen clips of Joe and boy we need trump back I don't think they see any of the same stuff online that shows the reality that is very obvious
That’s weird, cause Jordan Peterson definitely came across as easily the more aggressive one in that podcast.
Sometimes aggression is ok. Can you explain more what you mean, specifically? Because it's not obvious.
If you're agreeable by temperament, disagreeing doesn't feel as natural and it may come with "excess" negative emotion.
@@DanielColageo He was more aggressive than Destiny. He spoke more, interrupted more and made stronger controversial claims (like about pharma, for instance). It was still a good debate. But he was certainly more on edge than Destiny.
its frustrating to talk to someone whos ego demands to be right even when wrong.
@@nikkimousiex1931 Except Jordan was wrong so often in this debate when it came to vaccines. He is either grifting on the subject or incompetent.
That's really disappointing.I enjoyed the conversation. I just dont understand how Destiny any more 'wanted to be right" than Peterson. As soon as Destiny disagreed with him Peterson became very aggressive and Destiny matched his energy. They went back and forth and then by the end they brought the energy back down and although passionate I thought it was a nice good faith conversation. Did Jordan expect no pushback? .If Destiny had not pushed back people would have just said he got owned and had nothing to say. He didnt even go that hard. Did Jordan even want a conversation or just to lecture from a point of superiority?
yeah that doesn't really make sense to me either. People think Destiny is just some sort of debate lord, all he cares about is winning. The whole point of his show is to help people learn how to critically think for themselves, combat the far right, and also more recently to combat socialists on the left and extreme pro-Palestinian voices. And the interview proved that. He didn't engage in any sneaky rhetoric and answered all the questions directly. If he was looking to win he would be doing what the media did to Peterson a long time ago.
Because Destiny is all 💩
@Beyond_XP As far as force goes, Jordan didn't contend with Destiny that as a society, we use force all the time. We force people to drive the speed limit via fines. We force people that go to public school to have certain vaccines, etc. Not to mention, the government assumes powers during a crisis. Lincoln suspended habeous corpus, or the right to citize the war effort, during the Civil War. I'm not saying I agree with that, but there is precedent, and it doesn't mean we are slipping into tyranny.
Jordan was the one who brought up that the covid vaccines aren't vaccines, not Destiny.
The thing Jordan was most wrong about was Vaxers data being the gold standard for vaccine efficacy. It's not. It's randomized controlled trails. That's how every drug, medication, and vaccine is tested for. He has to know that he has a doctor..
destiny needs to be lectured, arrogant child gamer.
@@Beyond_XP 1.) He actually clearly qualified that statement by saying depending where you’re at, solar energy is good and competitive. Jordan acting like NOTHING good has come from making investments into renewables like solar energy is actually insane.
2.) The nuclear example was actually a good faith analogy to the argument Jordan Peterson was presenting…. Especially given that Jordan brought up both nuclear and vaccines 😂.
Idk man, it was a good heated conversation. Little disappointed in Jordan Petersons characterization of it.
How weird! The conversation was so great that Dr. Peterson even said he'd be happy to talk to Destiny again at the end of their conversation.
I forgot he said that. Also, the comments on that video were overwhelmingly positive coming from JBP's audience. They really should talk again in a few months.
sociopathy
@@smoovjazz8029 Yea I think Jordan really suffers from that.
"I don't like talking to people that want to be right, and Destiny wants to be right."
What am I even hearing? Is this going to be another wordplay on right vs correct? How stupid of an idea, who actively wants to be wrong or in the dark?
Destiny has explained that when he prepares for big interviews or debates like these he views them as more of a competition. He is interested in testing whether he can contend with opposing arguments while positing points that stand up to scrutiny. This I take to be the sentiment that JP is expressing as "Destiny wants to be right." He is arguing to prove he is right instead of collaboratively search for the truth or to test the validity of his own positions.
I have no idea why JP would take issue with this as he does that all the time in interviews. He's unable to give an inch in some of his early talks with Sam Harris. It's very strange to have qualms here, especially in retrospect. I get the feeling JP did not enjoy his performance in this 'debate', and so is finding ways to protect his ego by re-framing his feelings toward the event.
Are you a robot? Do you not understand what that common phrase means?
It refers to people who argue in order to win the argument and make themselves look smart rather than actually arrive at the truth. And Peterson literally explained that in this clip and you still managed to misunderstand it
@@josh_flash Destiny does debates to stress-test his ideas so that if any flaws are exposed, he can reevaluate his arguments. This is a perfectly reasonable way to approach discussions and is sadly not something a lot of people do enough.
ur an idiot it shouldnt be about being right or wrong a conversation should be about unveiling the truth both parties should be engaged toward that end. Not to win one over on each other to satisfy their pathetic egos. If you happen to be wrong or just not entirely correct then it is what it is. Who cares we are both learning and getting closer to whats real.
I guess the idea is that destiny wants to appear to be right despite being wrong, so he's willing to use all kinds of sophistic tactics to achieve this.
I felt like Jordan was fighting a stereotype of a far left progressive in his head instead of destiny, it made the debate more aggressive than it needed to be at points where there was no need for it. Destiny was pretty stoic jut Jordan came across as angry for being questioned.
Still a really enjoyable convo for me, but I agree JBP got too genuinely heated. They need to talk again. I bet they could both adjust their approach and get deeper into the weeds next time.
The problem is, Destiny just believes whatever the NYT tells him. So it's hard to debate that stuff with someone like him
@@martymcfly88mph35 The actual problem is that Jordan Peterson lives in conspiracies and I don't think expected to be pushed back the way he was.
@brianleonard6598 hmm maybe. Unfortunately, conspiracies are going on. If you don't believe that after what happened in 2020... I can't help. We live in different worlds
@@brianleonard6598 you might want to check out David "Bathhouse" Pakman then
Peterson yelled and got angry each time before Destiny chose to. I think this is projection in it's finest form.
So when did Peterson say Destiny was yelling or getting angry?
He said Destiny was trying to win the argument rather than have an authentic discussion. What does that have anything to do with how angry your tone is?
the irony
The same could be said for when Destiny starts speaking fast just to be contrarian for the sake of it.
Regardless, the discussion overall was fantastic!
@@user-bo9pn6hi4u
Yeah, its a shame that Peterson Doesn't want more of it.
Even if its with someone else, I think its nice that he talks to someone who has opposing views.
And should definitely not stop it now.
@@trokolisz3702 why would he it would make his views look worse?
The debate bros’ “Battle of Ideas” sure came to an end real fast once they had to start debating actual leftists rather than just reacting to Campus SJWs Getting Owned clips. Now suddenly “wanting to be right” is the problem
Destiny is hardly the first leftist that Peterson brought onto his PC. And certainly not the smartest. Nor will he be the last. Not much point in a man of Peterson's caliber talking to someone who thinks the Soviet Union didn't have a resource distribution problem. Destiny was out of his league by miles.
@@johnkross7227 if u watched the debate they literally hashed this out jp was using a broad definition that honestly made no sense equivocating command economies and redistribution is like saying right leaning people killed all the jews which is technically correct but it was nazi party and a lot of the push back was from the Christian right ALSO the concept redistributing is a concept were no serious thinker disagrees with ie we all live in mixed economies(schools hospitals even roads is distributing resources) AND they both think Swedish models works which HEAVILY distributes resources so characterizing it as a resource distribution problem is super reductive and saying destiny would disagree if ur being that reductive is also bad faith.
kinda wordy myb
Who exactly are the "Actual leftists" and why aren't the screeching hordes of campus sjws "actual leftists" ?
@@johnkross7227 What's your point here, people should only discuss things with people who are as knowledgeable as themselves? And in your opinion, lacking insight into e.g. the resource distribution of the Soviet Union disqualifies you from discussing any topic possibly relating to that? What a strange way to gatekeep just having a conversation.
That "Luciferian" accusation is disgusting. JP is so hypocritical in the way he demonizes his opponents by comparing them to Satan, Stalin and Hitler (Destiny says we shouldn't compare climate change policy groups to Hitler and he screams "WHY NOT!?") Then when someone compares him to a nazi (or a comic book version a la Red Skull) he starts crying about it! Literally crying on camera. Why does he think its ok to stigmatise his opponents as allies of the most evil people in history then get emotional when someone does the same to him? He's on another planet these days. Sad, because he was really insightful seven years ago.
TLDR - Jordan Peterson claims he doesn't care about being right in conversations... except in literally every previous conversation he's had in his life.
You're confusing being right with wanting to be right....
He was accidentally right, and didn’t care about it because he is super humble and above caring, but definitely still right because I like his talking points? 😂
@@MegaMerdeuxOh, so he just stumbles into it?
TLDR: OPs mouth is so full of destiny's 🥜 i couldn't make sense of what they said.
What video did you watch??
Jordan Peterson on his conversation with Sam Harris: "I wanted to win that argument"
Jordan now: "I stopped doing that when I was like 23"
Eh, peterson is pretending he doesnt want to be right just because he has an intellectualisation of the pitfalls of the intilect, but it's clear this isn't actualy integrated fully within him. He tells on himself in some sense.
😂 everybody wants to be right... he expla... take it easy ✌
Better that than the opposite number; that namely being only capable of sympathizing or attempting empathy for one's perceived ideological adversary when forced to. Especially with such a fast talking attempt at rationalizing a superiority complex that seems to be the primary method of Destiny. It's like a belittling parents who can't handle being questioned, and so then browbeats and attempts to intimidate and overwhelm with no handle or honesty to their own emotionally. Its temper tantrum shaped pseudo intellectualism. Then of course meek as milk and fake conciliatory when met with superior argumentation.
his temperamen is quite interesting now compared to his when he first arrived on the scene. he just seems totally unhinged now. looks more Luciferain than Godly to me.
@@smoovjazz8029 He has become what he swore to destroy - an ideologue.
@@Wildminecraftwolf yep. i saw it coming a long time ago but the moment he joined Daily Wire, i knew it was GG
Where is all this coming from? The conversation with Destiny seemed so cool and good faith to me. Why the sudden shift?
He’s scared.
Where did he say anything contradictory to what you just said?
Probably because he didn’t like that he looked immature when he got overly emotional during the discussion.
I think the real truth is Destiny did something that made JP reflect he got him to fall into the mindset of having to be right. if anyone in that convo felt like they were trying to be right it was JP. my guess is on reflection JP realized destiny was good as bringing out the competitiveness in him and it scares him. there were plenty of times where destiny said something and JP responded by trying to correct him instead of asking why he thought those things. A lot of the combativeness imo was coming from JP not destiny
@@thekingofnido truth is far from what you make it.
As a long time Peterson fan, I felt the exact opposite; That Jordan was trying hard to be right (example is with the corona vaccine debate where Destiny gave the car starting as an example of us trusting outside testing).
Me after I lose a debate - Pfft, he just wants to be right
I mean it would just look really bad if a clinical psychiatrist lost a debate to destiny of all people 💀
@@yoloswagprobro8227 A psychiatrist is a physician. Peter is a psychologist, he did not go to medical school.
Man, Jordan really can't stand being challenged huh? Destiny said that he intentionally went soft on Peterson in their convo because he would like to have future convos and yet it seems like even the toned down version of Destiny already broke JP. Sad, really.
Doesn't matter if he thinks he went soft. He was passive-aggressive and strawmanned Peterson. That's bad faith and trying to win the argument in such a manner.
The intellectual softness definitely annoyed jordan lol
@@therealbs2000 The worst part is that it wasn't that Destiny was "going easy", it's that Destiny offered any pushback whatsoever.
Peterson just wanted someone to lecture at.
Well, considering the fact that Destiny didn't have an answer to Peterson's worries besides "why would these corporations go corrupt", and the fact that Destiny later was doing the equivelant of coming up with comebacks in the shower the next day, I'd say you didn't truly grasp how that debate actually went down.
Even destiny's own subscribers are saying he likes to be obstinate.
@marktaylor526 it is more like the push back is annoying when it is reflexive and algorithmic.
I was disappointed with that interview...Jordan went way too offensive...Destiny wanted to talk about the psychology of politics but Jordan went unhinged...Canada literally destroyed his practice so I get why he hates one side so much but that's not everyone.
No, no. Jordan destroyed his career. He likes the right-wing grift better, and it pays more.
@@boriskmusicno no, Canada became authoritarian and persecuted a man for reasonable political opinions. Get it right
He did that all by himself actually when he decided to give Psychology profession a bad reputation by spouting unhindged conspiracy theories.
I thought the debate was Epic! Jordan annihilated every point Stephen tried to argue. Even called him out with ‘the need to be right over finding the truth.’ Stephen didn’t even realize Peterson, a clinical psychologist, was treating him like a Patient & gave him his diagnosis.
@@Sunday_Swagger Jordan saying there's too many vaccines for babies and medications aren't particularly useful is very concerning.
That’s very disappointing to hear and doesn’t sound very honest to me. That debate was easily one of most satisfying conversations on jbp channel for BOTH sides
That's why it's the 33rd most popular video on his channel. I also thought it was a super interesting and fun convo, and want to see a follow-up convo soon-ish.
hopefully Peterson can practice what he preaches. If a lot of people really liked it, maybe he should do some soul searching to understand why instead of casting off Destiny as a wannabe know it all. But i know he won't, sadly. i used to be a big Peterson fan.
@@smoovjazz8029 destiny ONLY knows very legacy establishment new. He can only argue knowing half of the facts.
Destiny should talk with Jordan more. Destiny did a great job
He did an okayish job. He is one of the few respectable people in the left.
@@Abzuhuzwn Destiny isn't on the left!? Kindly, explain. I'll get the popcorn ready.
@@wakkablockablaw6025 he literally spent the past 2 years launching a crusade against wokeism. He even has his own change my mind video called wokeness has gone to far in which he provides better epistemological arguments than people like Crowder. Argues in favour of Kyle Rittenhouse, pro gun, should I go on?
@@Abzuhuzwn Yes...I'm aware Destiny isn't far right...Are you claiming Destiny is center-right?
@@wakkablockablaw6025 Destiny is a Liberal, so more center left
2:32 This is a lie. He still acts this way on X. Such a cope at the end of this conversation. JP allows his conservative leanings to guide his analysis, and discounts by default any view or argument that does not originate from that perspective.
I dont think its possible to act agreeable and nonconfrontational on twitter lol
amazing point. it's like he has no self awareness
"I am an agreeable person" That's total nonsense, Peterson goes nuts when you say anything contrary to his beliefs.
You don't understand what agreeableness is. Go read.
Yeah, I've never considered him agreeable. He lectures on the horrors and murders of communism and then accuses all of his opponents and critics of being communist or at least communist-adjacent. He's always very combative right out of the gate unless its somebody he agrees with on 80% of important issues.
@@bradders9743 Lol he absolutely does not accuse all of his opponents of being communist. He didn't do that with Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, etc.
He only did it with the ones who are on the far left (communism by the way is associated with the far left). You're bad at thinking, so stop doing it.
Having the natural inclination of agreeableness (which is what he means) is different to actively trying to disagree with a point, being an agreeable person doesn't make you never dish out criticism. Agreeable people are more likely to be passive, gullible etc, or aggressive & dismissive as a way to over compensate, it means you're sensitive to rejection i.e. "going nuts", Peterson definitely fits the latter behavior. A disagreeable person will lie to you without any sort of remorse, they'll happily listen to your complains and not care, they're less likely to be effected by shame, and also less likely to actively try and socially shame others, this is not Peterson's behaviour.
Destiny is also very agreeable (latest talk with Dr. K proves it), he's just addicted to the rush of disagreement.
This is what you get when anyone can watch and comment on high level discussions. Yes he's not agreeable when talking to people he DISAGREES with. Brilliant point numb nutz.
I used to have respect for him but what a dumb thing to say. I don’t agree with destiny on quite a bit but this seems petty. So annoying.
As someone who watches “Destiny” I don’t see him as beyond criticism at all but all of the criticisms of him I see have nothing to do with the substance of anything he has ever said or done. Also the claim implicitly levied by Peterson in this clip is that Destiny was arguing with Peterson just to win an argument which doesn’t accurately represent any portion of their 2 and a half hour conversation. They were arguing because of authentic meaningful disagreements and Destiny literally agreed with Peterson at least half a dozen times throughout the video like when Peterson levies his concerns around the excesses of environmental extremism as just one example.
I think it’s a total shame that Peterson has this perception of Destiny as being performative for the sake of winning an argument and I think actually that more accurately describes how Peterson was behaving throughout the conversation. When Peterson says “[how about 80 vaccines, at once, for babies? I think that’s a little risky]” he is over exaggerating to such a ridiculous extent that it mischaracterizes the reality of how many vaccines children receive throughout their entire childhood let alone as “babies” (a perfect victim instrumentally invoked to win an argument). He ends up misinforming his audience through this “exaggeration”(i feel this is generous, it was practically a blatant lie) in a way that serves an instrumental purpose from the perspective of winning the argument in the moment against Destiny who, because he cares more about not saying something wrong than winning the argument, acquiesces to Petersons ridiculous characterization because he is not sufficiently familiar with the vaccine schedules for children and he doesn’t want to just say baseless inaccurate nonsense in an intelligent way to win an argument like Peterson did in that instance.
I think Jordan Peterson is projecting aspects of himself he doesn’t like onto Destiny then disliking Destiny for reminding himself of those disliked aspects of self.
P.S. if you read this Jordan you should know that Destiny would gladly talk to you again about any topic you’re interested in receiving his perspective on and you’re right that Destiny is prideful but he comes by his pride honestly he works very hard and takes himself very seriously in his capacity as a servant of the truth.
Probably most importantly, he is a prominent left-wing figure who speaks to you without seeking to humiliate you and if you can’t recognize that it’s your mistake.
You are brain f@#$&1;g this way too hard.
I think you are way overthinking this, “destiny” is contrarian and argues to win the debate,, not to find truth. Peterson alluded to this reality. It’s really that simple.
@@juantoomany7202 How do you know? There's at least a few debates where he proudly takes L's, and he *most importantly* changes his viewpoint after to incorporate what the other side said.
@@juantoomany7202 can you provide an example of Destiny arguing for the sake of winning? Cuz the OP provides a lot of evidence of Jordan doing that in regard to vaccines.
@@rokoi3 bull 💩
This is actually the most depressing thing I've seen. I thought that was such an excellent conversation. And for Jordan Peterson to come away with it saying that he doesn't like people who like to be right while the only reason he doesn't like that is because he likes to be right? Pathetic. I expected more out of this man.
indeed it is. and it may give some insight why he apparently doesn't talk with the left. or they won't talk with him. here you have a reasonably center left guy and Peterson is getting ptsd from it. he is very soft ever since he became a twitter warrior.
pathetic is too harsh... maybe disappointed
He implied that he doesn't like the desire of wanting to be right, because it's predicated on narcissism 2:52
You seem to have completely failed to understand that.
You might have got it wrong.
What he means is that some people are not interested in truly being right, they just want to appear to be right.
It was remarkable how patient and agreeable Destiny handled him, and now this. My estimation of Peterson has plummetted
Destiny had kid gloves on and was very respectful in his pushback. His perspective just upset you. You probably have sneaking suspicion he is right and that angers and upsets you.
The probability of America sinking into the ocean is higher than Destiny being philosophically correct. He's a liberal with good rethoric, that's all. Every single major intelectual figure from the past debunks anything he has to say.
That's not how that works, and Destiny is an adult. Kid gloves? Really? Destiny critically engaged to a degree, but was dismissive or unwilling to explore ideas the way JP normally does on podcasts. Destiny was also wrong or misinformed on almost everything he said, just FYI.
@@piercekozlowskiMisinformed on what exactly? Give one example and proof that he was misinformed
@@yoshypl9901Crickets...
@piercekozlowski Jordan said children get 80 vaccines as one time, when it's actually 5. Said there is 20 to 30%excess deaths in Europe, not including deaths from the Ukrainian war. Which isn't true according to Eurostat. He said that vaxers data is the gold standard for vaccine safety when it's randomized controlled trails. Name one time Destiny said something wrong. I'll wait. ..
I feel like Jordan framed that unfairly because if he took a little bit more time to learn about destiny he would understand his dedication and openness to finding truth, and changes his mind more than you would think
Absolutely. It depends on the topics being discussed. If Destiny was talking with someone about ideas that he didn't have solid beliefs about he would not come across as "wanting to be right". Obviously the topics JP and Destiny talked about were ones where Destiny felt he knew enough about them that he could confidently assert and defend his opinions, thus sounding like he "wants to be right". But I seriously don't see how Destiny handled himself any differently than how JP did.
Even the occasional clip shows Destiny stating something then instantly questioning himself and then looking it up right then and there.
I think some of his arguments, such as calling the colossal enormity of the Catholic Church comparable to the gigantism of the government, indicated Destiny tended to just seek being contrarian, which is being right against an argument presented.
He's dedicated to prove himself right... anyone that's taken the time to genuinely learn something can tell.
@@m.caeben2578 If he was just trying to be contrarian he would have doubled down instead of immediately conceding that the distinctions Peterson pointed out were valid. It was probably just the first point that popped into his head and when he realized it wasn't a good comparison he immediately backed off of it.
I’m a Jordan fan but Destiny came off as really good faith during that convo even though he’s combative in other debates
Yea. It was super fun to watch
Only reason Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro spoke to Destiny is because Destiny happens to be the only major liberal channel that remained pro-Israel after recent events. Destiny is a clout hound. If he had the opportunity to talk to Peterson and Shapiro years ago, he would have snatched it up. Why did it take this long?
Destiny is never good faith.
Destiny is on amphetamines or cocaine in that debate. He has coke jaw the entire time - weird erratic lateral movements when talking. I guess he needs a major upper to "debate" Jordan
@@tear728He's prescribed Adderall for ADHD.
Slightest bit of pushback and Jordan is crying? "waa waa why don't you agree with everything I say!"
Peterson was literally in full fire&brimstone mode during that convo, WAY more aggressive than Destiny. Crazy how a psychologist is projecting so hard. However I felt like by the end it was obviously a good conversation and it seemed like they were on good terms. Weird to me that this was his takeaway.
Obviously Russell Brand is more fun for JP to talk to because he’s a Christian conspiracy theorist and more interested in circlejerking than a real back-and-forth.
Russell Brand is more fun because he is a comedian.... Or maybe I should say a funny one. Love how you are trying to make the case that the guy who made his name by owning 12yo kids is not the one trying to be the smartest guy in the room. Peterson was in full fire and brimstone mode cause he actually gives a damn about the issues.
@@johnkross7227 Peterson and Destiny are victims of the same treatment: they're people with nuanced positions who are mischaracterized by surface-level morons who just skim headlines and don't know who they actually are or what they're actually about. The fact that you're a Peterson fan but believe those lies about Destiny is so ironic.
"Wanting to be right is a bad idea, I don't want to talk to people who want to be right like Destiny" Wow JP's intellectual cowardice is getting visible
If one’s whole purpose is on being right, or winning, there is no room for correction or improvement. Destiny is extremely arrogant and condescending.
@@danc2531 Wanting to be right is absolutely not the same as wanting to "win". If your goal is to be right means your objective is having the correct position regardless of what you may want the correct position to be.
@@danc2531 Everyone should aspire to be right.
@@bradders9743 I believe everyone should aspire to find the truth. This takes humility. We’re not always going to be right. We need to accept this possibility.
Im sorry but Destiny is the most self critical political comentary person I have ever seen. If you would like evidence, watch his convo with Dr. K or his post debate analysis. He is most definitely not just "wanting to be right" he gets blinded by anger but always goes back to correct it because people sent it to him a million times. You can see through emotions just be honest with youself, he is not malicous, he asks questions and honestly engages, listen to him more and I promise you will learn helpful perspective. Even if you disagree with him, that shouldnt stop you from engaging with his opinions honestly and without hate.
Damn I used to respect Jordan Peterson but stuff like this erodes that respect
I'm sorry but Destiny did a great job and I found he was arguing in good faith. I've see way more narcissistic bad faith debates where a person uses all kinds of insults and fallacies to win. JP just thought Destiny would be an idiot who can be verbally put in his face but it didn't happen. I'd liike to actually see those two debate formally actually so JP can't cut him off so many times like he did.
Destiny arguing in good faith? Are you high on coccaine bot?
What the hell is he talking about? Both people argued to be right lmao
The implication is that Destiny cared more about being crowned as "winner" than to actually reach the truth through conversation. This implies Destiny was using rhetorical tricks, rather than fair arguments, none of which JP will actually specify.
Surprised to hear this take from Jordan. I always thought these conversations were supposed to be oriented around truth, not an agreeable outcome…
I have never heard so much projection coming from Jordan before.
I love his content but he acted like a kid with an attitude problem on his stream with destiny. he got called out and acted like he wanted to take his ball and go home. only made himself look worse in this clip accusing of what he did himself
It’s so sad to see Peterson decline into such dishonesty. I grew up in highschool reading his books and listening to his psychology practices when I was around 15-17 in highschool back in 2016. He wants to act like destiny only cares about being right, what a joke cause I could say the sane way about jp in the way he engaged in the debate, he just seemed like a grumpy old man because some younger guy doesn’t agree. Not only did he lose his temper embarrassingly as a clinical psychology, but he just rambled and rambled and talked in circles. He didn’t want to engage in the topics in honest but from only the angle that he particularly agrees with. Then he tries to play the card like oh I was like destiny when I was 23 but I’m so aware and perfect that I stopped trying to win debates and use verbal power as soon as I noticed a problems, seems like a load of bs, because one of the biggest reasons why Peterson is so popular is cause he built his fame in his late adult (well past 23) life debating and “being right” and using verbal strength on tv shows and online spaces to get traction. His persona was literally built on being right and owning media members while also speaking eloquently and using verbal prowess.
I don't think he's dishonest. He seems like he's offended and emotional, but hopefully time will bring them together again for a follow-up convo.
@@Cuptial yeah but because he’s emotional and offended, he became dishonest about the integrity of the conversation and destiny’s motive
@@Cuptial it would be nice if they got back together but according to JP, it was a horrible time and conversation lol
I haven't seen JP ever so on edge or aggressive in a convo before. Did you really feel threatened by the things Destiny said? Maybe you'll grow from learning from it rather than disparage him.
"When you have something to say, say it out loud with your shoulders back. Say it out proud so that everybody could hear. Do it for once, and you’ll realize how much it matters. The effect it gives, speaking your opinion, does have an impact."-JBP. Exception is when you say it to him... then you're just trying to be right. the good doctor needs to retreat from his echo chamber and reintroduce himself to the world. It's funny to see people criticizing Destiny for trying to be right, documenting all the instances. When was the last time someone has seen Peterson admit he was wrong about anything? when was the last time you've seen huff and puff aggressively at those he disagrees with. He's obviously not used to dealing with someone who will throw back when Peterson gets in his face all red faced with his attempts to intimidate. Peterson is sore he was embarrassed. He is not as antifragille as he used to now that he's moved away from psychology to parroting right wing talking points. it's quite a shame. he used to be very interesting. That's a Peterson problem, not a Destiny one.
Im so confused by the "wanting to be right" critique. I understand that the desire to be correct can make you annoying to deal with, but being correct and consistent is valuable, no?
I find it hard to believe that Jordan is temperamentally agreeable when he consistently embroils himself in a new conflict every other day...
He's a clinical psychologist by trade, as he pointed out. Age and experience in the public light may have taught him how to disagree. Simple as that.
There's a difference between being agreeable and lying.
@@JordanBPetersongo clean your room
@@ctoxneezer8666 thats good... thats really good🤣
he is agreeable thing is that he is thinking long term, so he often trades short term conflict for long term peace.
I love Jordan Peterson, but he didn’t make any sense here
Lost a lot of respect for Peterson here tbh. I respected the hell out of him for legitimately engaging with a lot of the conversations with Destiny. When normally he avoids them or is talking to sycophant's. Or at least someone who isn't able to defend themselves as well. Hearing him say this is just sad. Recontextualizes the entire thing. By the sounds of it. He was in fact not really engaging with Destiny in good faith. It also explains why he was so aggressive in the conversation. Even though he himself believes he was the reasonable one.
It was probably the best conversation JP has had on his channel and by the sounds of it. It's not one that JP wants to repeat. Which is a shame. Really doesn't seem like JP actually lives up to what he claims here. JP very obviously wants to be right and is upset that Destiny was in fact more right on some things than he is. JP seems to be in a bit of an echo chamber atm
"What they hell do you mean I'm disagreeable, you bedevilled egg?!"
Honestly it feels Destiny brought out the same version of Jordan that Sam Harris did. The main difference is Jordan saw Sam as an “intellectual dark web” equal. For Destiny on the other hand Jordan probably views him the same as he would Andrew Schulz, just not as funny. So getting so aggressive and confrontational in that discussion probably felt a little shameless to Jordan. He shouldn’t feel that way though Destiny pretty much trounced him in that discussion
Of course Destiny wants to be right. We ALL want to be right. That's not a character flaw, Jordan.
Keep telling yourself that.
@@JordanBPeterson Who wants to be wrong?
@@JordanBPeterson Why did you lie about babies receiving 80 vaccines at once when it's really 5 at most?
@@JordanBPeterson You said in the Sam Harris debate that you strive to be right. Also, you misstated that children get 80 vaccines at once. Do you want to recant that statement, or do you strive to be wrong?
How does Destiny walk all over Peterson with very simple questions like 'why do you trust that your car engine starts in the morning?'
@@asimhussain8716 Why do you expect it to start?
@@asimhussain8716 defects that can have fatal consequences, and only show up on the 10th or 100th time, i.e. before the warranty's out. That's the whole point of regulation
@@asimhussain8716 I paraphrased that section of the debate. JBP claimed he doesn't have to trust what institutions say, and that he can determine what to trust on his own. D said that was impossible, and said you can't function in the modern world without trusting institutions. This was the vaccines portion of the debate if you're curious
@@rokoi3huge difference between trusting an institution made of people with ulterior motives and a physical object
@@divinecomedian2 the debate was talking about man made products, thereby the object would have the same issues. I find it hard to argue for the opposite without just becoming anti-regulation, if you manage to do so present below
'Just because I'm agreeable doesn't mean I'm an idiot.' 😂
After the benzo addiction.... I gotta admit that Peterson's intelligence seems to have dropped by a lot.
@@jackeagleeye3453What has he said to make you feel that way?
@@Mcphan9946 Really I've seen the guy cry a lot over trivial matters, he seems addicted to click baity stuff on twitter, and he seems to always talk about stuff from a very religious perspective. I don't think religion and psychology mix well, and in many ways they are opposites.
@@jackeagleeye3453 that's what people outside the science of psychology say, maybe it's physiology and religion that doesn't mix well (but hey it's part of what make up our thoughts and emotions so it still makes sense). Anyways Jordan often uses phenomenology using the symbolic world of religion (if anything, he's more scientific that way, literally dissecting religions into just those, albeit of course he knows that there are things that's still beyond comprehension just like real scientists always know their rational limits)
@@jackeagleeye3453 What does crying have to do with intelligence? And what's the trivial thing he cried over? Name one thing he's cried over that's trivial.
He's been talking about religion since the 90s, the entire time he was a psychology researcher, etc. He talked about it just as much before his illness.
There's a difference between feeling like you've bested someone in an argument, and actually being right.
Maybe. But actually being right and not besting your opponent in the argument, resulting in him 'winning' the debate, is absolutely maddening.
@@cdv5514
Being right is an unfair advantage in a debate. It's literally, like, the closest thing to a rhetorical cheat code. If you fumble that, you've earned the loss.
You're right about that.
@@Kimani_White Excuse me but I think you're conflating because Jordan is saying this but look a this way; you can feel to be right about something and that doesn't mean that you're closed mind to hear what people needs to said. In reality nobody who argues do it to be wrong (although I had have conversations where some friends correct me and if the environment and my honesty is there I can feel good about being wrong), Jordan is tricking you that he doesn't want to exchange ideas with someone that is better than him in his tone policing voice. Jordan knows and if you're a fan, he loves to fight with people «who behave unhinged» to defend what they believe is right, and that's because Jordan knows how weak they are, like the lady in the TV show for example.
Take care.
@@davidpinto-fernandez7132
If someone is determined to argue a position, even if presented with facts and logic falsifying it, they're more concerned with maintaining the _feeling_ of being right, rather than actually being correct. Unfortunately, it's fairly rare for people to readily concede to substantive corrections of their views, because admitting to being wrong or mistaken is uncomfortable. Learning and intellectual integrity require humility.
_"Show an honest man that he's wrong, and he'll either stop being wrong or stop being honest."_
Jordan is doing the things he says he doesnt like lol. The insane opinions and claims about vaccines and climate change show this.
Name one claim he made about those topics that's insane. And explain why.
"I don't like people who disagree with me" The intellectual juggernaut Peterson crumbles at the first hint of pushback? surely not.. 🤣
This just makes Peterson look triggered when confronted by other ideas. Literally can’t think of anyone who wants to be right, but is open to changing their mind if confronted with facts or better logic than Destiny.
At least attack something wrong that he said instead of painting him with this broad brush that doesn’t require any intellectual rigor on your part.
JP is an agreeable person?🤔 In all of his interviews he disagrees with his opponents 🤨
I can’t believe Peterson had a bad impression of Destiny. Destiny is probably the most open minded commentator online. He’s the only one I know of to significantly modify his opinions with new info even though it hurts his bottom line.
It can't be that bad of an impression or he wouldn't have had Destiny on.
Destiny comes off as an extremely arrogant person. His talent is that he can dialogue at a quick pace. I want to see him in an academic setting, however, in a traditional debate. I believe it would show his weaknesses when he can’t interrupt his opponents.
@@danc2531 He doesn't seem to interrupt if the other person won't interrupt either.
I think Destiny is a reasonable debater for the left, certainly impressive in how he discusses foreign politics in particular. Where he fails for me is in the realm of morality. Not at all to be on a high horse, I have done things I’m not proud of, but I recognize that upon reflection. Destiny embraces degeneracy. Sleeping around with people, sharing his spouse with other partners, being intimate with men while he was married, and so on. Which if he wants to do that stuff, I am not one to throw stones. What bothers me is that he normalizes those sorts of things and defends them to his young, impressionable audience.
He had a bad impression because he got cooked.
He’s a clinical psychologist by profession. The books and videos came later.
And Professor. He posted his lectures online for years before he became famous. I stumbled on them while in Graduate School for Psychology. Fame began after his testimony about bill C-16 in Canada
I'm not sure I agree with the characterisation that wanting to be right is necessarily a bad thing.
I thing that's wanting to be right as the cost of other things.
ie if I was in a relationship and I insisted on concluding every discussion or argument with an admission that I was correct, I'd be doing so against the best interest of that relationship, the resentment of my partner and the longevity of the relationship. Seems in this instance the cost for needing to be right was too high.
But ordinarily, wanting to be right I think just means having the most accurate and holistic assessment that you can, such that you're convincing to other people. I don't know if that quality in itself is bad.
In itself it's not a bad thing, but Peterson is talking about Destiny. You can clearly see he's trying to be right for the wrong reasons, maybe ego validation or ideological perversion. You can tell who's the one who is trying to be right for a genuine concern for the truth and who's the one who is just vomiting arguments.
@@tonyjp83 And on that front we'll have to just agree to disagree unfortunately. Such things are not clear to me at all.
yeah it's like super traumatizing that Destiny thinks he's right that the MRNA vaccine is a vaccine.
@@smoovjazz8029 I could go deeper but I did a cursory google for definitions and such and found this:
'a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease'
coupled with this
'mRNA vaccines tell the body how to make a protein that produces immunity against specific microbes. In contrast, traditional vaccines use weakened or dead microbes, or pieces of them, to stimulate immunity'
Can you tell me what the disqualifying factor is regarding calling it a vaccine from your perspective? I know this is a meme but... genuinely curious.
Liked this for putting the good ol ad at the end
Narcissists always want attention but can't stand criticism, he made it so obvious here.
Interviewer asks about Destiny, Peterson talks almost entirely about himself (which is also what he did in his podcast with Destiny btw). Then interviewer asks again about Destiny, Peterson responds by, once again talking about himself, as someone who is so modest he "doesn't want to be right" (because wanting to be right is"luciferian" for some reason).
So basically because he didn't do so well against destiny, Destiny is the devil incarnate and also too immature and arrogant to deserve to talk with him again.
JP is a narcissist, clearly.
He sure does like calling his opponents allies of Satan and the Stazi. He doesn't get called out on this stigmatism of his opponents enough.
So Jordan doesn’t like that destiny wants to be on the right side of the things when he debates about a certain topics gotcha, anything else?
I think that Jordan has studied a lot and now thinks he is more right than Destiny is, so there's conflict between two people that want to be right but one, or perhaps both parties don't want to concede on much.
It's unfair though to characterize Destiny as the only one wanting to be right
I thought JP vs Destiny was great. Emotions ran high but it was still civil, there was no personal attacks and they shook hands at the end. The real winner was the audience. They both laid their reasonings and basics and debated it and in the end it was really up to you a viewer to decide who you lean or agree with.
Dang. I thought their conversation was great, but I guess Jordan is upset he did his 'stern' voice and destiny would still argue with him.
I dunno if Jordan ever considered that destiny may also believe he is right, it's not that he wants to be It's that he believes he is, same as Jordan believes he himself is correct.
“Always wants to be right” seems like a self righteous way of saying I hate when people don’t agree with me.
Of course Jordan Peterson still "wants to be right" and "weaponize his verbal intelligence." Nowadays, he's just opted for a more veiled approach of one-upmanship -- which is more disingenuous. If he was truly humble about his interactions with other people like Destiny, he wouldn't be bloviating about it.
It’s hardly disingenuous to believe what you say to be right.
@@29memyselfandi Tell that to the leftist idealogue called Destiny with a straight face.
@@29memyselfandi Yet he implies it is disingenuous when Destiny does it.
The Destiny convo was the first time in years that ive felt a small rekindling of respect for Peterson, but hearing him characterize things this way has snuffed that out. Seems like JP has just gotten so accustomed to being surrounded by butt-sniffers that he's lost all tolerance for any kind of pushback. The moralizing BS about "wanting to be right is Luciferian" is extra pathetic. Obviously if you're going to bat defending your beliefs, you believe youre right, otherwise youre just one of the postmodernists Peterson hates so much.
Saying Destiny just wants to be right is such a nothing statement. So he should want to be wrong instead? Wtf haha
Jordan is talking like someone who rarely has to face pushback for anything he says anymore. Ironic considering that Jordan always whines about people on the left not wanting to come on his podcast. What was he expecting to happen, exactly? Destiny is gonna walk in there, listen to Jordan make strong claims about climate change and vaccines, and not challenge him on anything? Not even counting the fact that he was the one that started getting heated first. A good question to ask Jordan would be, how should Destiny have conducted himself for him to not appear as "wanting to be right"?
well written.
I don't believe Destiny was only trying to win either but let's not assume Jordan was asking for zero push back.
Exactly what I was thinking. When you debate, you will be staunch in your belief after doing research which means that you will argue strongly in favor or against it. Ofc it will come across as "wanting to be right." The important part is that you are willing to admit when the opponent has good arguments, which Destiny does all the time. The issue is Jordan didn't have good arguments and expected Destiny to concede when that wasn't earned.
@@wakkablockablaw6025 I don't think so either but it's just odd that he's saying Destiny only wants to be right. Did he feel like that Destiny became too confrontational.. or too much pushback? I would say Destiny was certainly more calm in the conversation than Jordan at least. I'm just curious as to why Jordan feels that way when nothing in that conversation that would lead me to understand his perspective here.
His suit jacket is everything!!!
Great that he wore it for this interview.
I believe it's called "drip" by the kids.
@@CSSVirginia I have no idea what that is , but I like it !!!
@@marytygett4189 hahahaha. Same here
@@CSSVirginia It’s a slang term for cool and fashionable 😎( I just googled it ) I’m gonna start using it now 😂
I’m pretty sure Jordan spent most of that conversation dancing around his own opinion while destiny owned everything he believed upfront. I guess Jordan has become used to low level conversations since most guests of his don’t really hold him to a statement he’s makes
You obviously didn’t watch the debate they had. Man against boy.
Oh no see, you must be confused. We weren't talking about the conversation you had in your head, we were talking about the one they had in the video. Where Jordan Peterson pretty much owned him.
Lol it's so funny noticing just how wildly the different audiences can interpret the exact same convo. I felt very much the same as you @Gonjabario. I'm a huge Peterson fan but he was just reactionary, defensive, he totally caricatured what he THOUGHT was Destiny's view and ended up sliding out of his psychologist's calm and just leaping about and missing the point. I'm glad he feels convicted about things, and I think he's looked into the climate stuff more than some people assume. But anyone who watched the convo ought to have seen that Destiny kept his head better and stayed more true to the purpose of the conversation.
@@SbonisoMMDlamini "Owned him" Jordan has a lot of disillusion young men as fans. Why don't you adress his points where he was wrong.
Imagine being such an arrogant ultracrepidarian like this lmao. Wow, lol. "I’m pretty sure Jordan spent most of that conversation dancing around his own opinion while destiny owned everything he believed upfront." Just wow, lol.
"I guess Jordan has become used to low level conversations since most guests of his don’t really hold him to a statement he’s makes" Sure you aren't talking about Destiny and just projecting on to Jordan? Destiny is the one who's King of Midwits. Dude thinks he's super intelligent cause he went up against simple-minded grifters like Vaush, Hasan, F&F, Whatever, Sneako, Benny Johnson, and etc.. Meanwhile, he goes up against people who know deeply what they're talking about like Shapiro, Owens, The Lead Attorney, Dave Smith, and JP - suddenly Destiny gets owned easy af.
Hum, I feel like it's a shame he came to that conclusion. Is it not possible that both JBP and Destiny think they are right rather than one or the other "wanting to be right"? I felt like the conversation was intetesting and well balanced. We need to hear a health clash of ideals so different views can get an idea of what they are missing.
Destiny wants to be right? Bro, that is the worst criticism I have ever ever heard of anyone
I loved Destiny and Peterson. But I don't think the idea that he just "wants to be right" is satisfying. Destiny seemingly wants to have the correct opinion and allign with the "true" perspective. I think he's very capable of changing his mind of new information is provided to him.
Destiny definitely want to be right. He is also getting better at not just preparing to debate, but have a strong methodology to be actually right. Peterson is more open to be being wrong. But he is also more susceptible to terrible opinion.
Has he looked, in the meantime, into the by then 'new' information Peterson provided to him about excess deaths ? I sincereley doubt it
Perhaps saying Destiny wants to be right was too much but he does give that impression when he was talking to Jordan Peterson certainly. The way he tried to make Jordan out to be someone who doesn't care about science and how Jordan said he wasn't going to play that stupid game is just one of the examples.
Kudos to Jordan for not participating in that rubbish.
@@cdv5514 Yes he did a little when he reacted to his conversation with Peterson. Turn out the more people were vaccinated, the less excess deaths there was.
@@Sednoob Lol, no. 2021, 2022 and 2023 worse than 2020, for every western country. Gee I really don't know how I should interpret that...
I think what happened is Peterson debated someone who is very, very good at debating. You don’t have to agree with anything Stephen says to recognize he comes extremely prepared and very seldom doesn’t have an informed rebuttal.
I'm quite happy Destiny wants to be right, and as someone who used to like you JBP I will continue to watch people who strive to be right on issues.
Really sorry you stopped striving for that once you got your career in the safe spot its in now. the JBP we all loved 6 years ago wouldn't have had this take.
Destiny often gets to a point where he gets a smug smirk and just seems to argue for the sake of arguing and when you make a good point that should make him reconsider, he just chuckles and says something to the effect of “alright man, whatever”.
I cannot take people like that seriously and I too would probably lose it after a point.
Trust God when you pray it works. He said all we need to do is ask in prayers. My testimony spans from penury to $47,000 bimonthly, and you stay and doubt that he doesn't answer prayers. Make that altar now and spend time there. A change is on the way. Amen!!!
Isaiah 43:18-19, Behold, I will do a new thing, Now it shall spring forth; Shall you not know it? I will even make a road in the wilderness And rivers in the desert.
Help me oh Lord I'm in need of finance, my sister is lying helpless in the hospital I pray for quick recovery Amen!!!!
God will surely keep her saved ok. i wish I could send you some funds but don't know to connect with you!!
What a testimony! l'm glad you got your life back together
What is it you do ?
Peterson is right about the psychological attitude of Destiny. Destiny loves being right and winning debates, and he has stated that this is a core aspect of his motivation. However, this as ultimately led to him being correct about many things, and we should keep that in mind. If someone speaks the truth, it might not matter how they got there.
Exactly. When he says Destiny just wants to be right, the insinuation is that he just wants to "win" rather than reach the truth, which implies he's using dishonest arguments or rhetorical tactics, none of which will be named. This is a common argument that conservatives and lefties alike use about Destiny. They claim he's just a rhetorician but no dishonest arguments or tactics are ever specified. I'm starting to wonder whether "he just wants to be right" really translates to "I don't like being wrong".
How are debates supposed to happen if you're not trying to get at the truth ? Destiny sure can get energetic, but rhetorically speaking he was on point.
JBP was the one who started getting worked up to begin with, not to mention he's the one who brought the disagreeable topics up
@@buttersnart Worked up? Maybe. Corrective and passionate is better. The things Destiny was saying at times were outrageous or over simplified, and JP, who spends most of his time thinking about such topics, rightly got irked at times when Destiny refused to explore further nuance after being corrected lol
@@piercekozlowski Exemples ?
@@abdc2990destiny argued about general "conservatives" and never really challenged Peterson.
@@L0rd0fTh3N3rdz Yes he did. He argued against peterson's views of vaccines, he argued against the idea that green activism was a death cult etc.
And yes as he does that he also tackles points JP hasn't already made but that he knows some people in the audience would harbor
Isn’t seeking truth like JPs thing? Wanting to be right is just that. I want to know whether I like a thing or not that I have the facts on my side so that I can build on that knowledge. Man what a fall from grace.
Weird how Jordan has never levied this "always wants to be right" criticism at Ben Shapiro maybe because they agree on almost all topics
..... Ben Shapiro listens to understand. He concedes. It's just rare since he only debates people he knows he can beat. 😊
"I learned it at 24 but stopped doing it at 23" lol
My man Jordan has unlocked time-travel with his incredible brain.
I thought I misheard too
People can stop engaging in things and not fully understand why. Quote chimps are thick today.
Lol It probably took him a year of self-analysis to fully understand why he shouldn't do it. Before then to stop doing something that feels wrong (even without reason) is still plausible.
"I don't like talking to people who wanna be right, and destiny wants to be right"
Where is the full interview?
It's on locals right now, but it will be on youtube in about a week, give or take a few days.
JBP did a bussiness decision. Dont talk to people that can hold their own.
Probably why he won't have another discussion with Matt Dillahunty.
Ha. That's a judgement you certainly can't back up with evidence. I love how people make these kinds of judgements on Peterson when most likely they themselves couldn't hold their own with him himself. So quick to judge. Why? And he's human. You expect him to be perfect or else?
@@aaronpannell6401 Dillahunty is boring. Same old arguments. Same old tropes. He brings nothing new to any debate. If anyone has turned new-atheism into a quasi religion its him. Harris, Dennett, Dawkins are far more adapt at debating religion. Peterson debates Harris often and literally only spoke to Dennett just before his death. (RIP). A debate between Dawkin's and Peterson is in the works apparently.
@@anthonybrett I can agree Matt doesn't have anything new, but Jordan was making the most wild claims with lose evidence as if they were concrete. Some people have said this was when he was on benzos so maybe that's why, but if you actually watch it, I think you will see what I'm talking about.
@@aaronpannell6401 I agree Peterson went off into "crazed" territory a few times. I thought Destiny did a great job actually and for the most part it was a good, civil discussion. I mean, like him or not, Peterson is certainly not a fool. Harris or Dennett wouldn't have spoken to him otherwise. I for one wouldn't like to debate him high or sober. ;)
Destiny owned Peterson in that debate
Thank you to everyone for pointing out the blazer. Wouldn’t have bothered to notice.
JP has slowly turned into a big disappointment. Shame.
Peterson did incredibly well discussing his points against Destiny.
The issue with his emotional build-up is as mentioned below in another comment, "Destiny wants to appear to be right despite being wrong, so he's willing to use all kinds of sophistic tactics to achieve this."
I think this is incredibly frustrating for Peterson because there were definitely some topics where the evidence was pretty clear or not so clear but clear enough that you would need a substantial piece of evidence to go against it. But Destiny couldn't provide it and really build off of it.
And so, many times within the debate, Destiny presented many extremely weak points towards big and complex topics that were discussed. Peterson literally had to repeat himself and reiterate his statements many times.
I could tell Peterson was struggling only due to the expectation of attempting to have an in-depth and intellectual debate with Destiny and yet that expectation kept clashing with the question of whether Destiny is actually smart to have these types of discussions.
Combine that with Destiny's debating tactics, which involved a lot of stress-testing of weak arguments or immediately choosing to disagree and it becomes frustrating to discuss anything, period.
Just look at the moment where they discussed Climate Change...
It's like going up against an opponent in Street Fighter who is supposed to bring a challenge but instead, they end up choosing to spam one single move to see how far they can go with it. And the worst part is, they know what they are doing.
Like cmon, have some class...
Ok
the mental gymnastics lol....
Jordan looked and sounded insane in that debate with destiny
Says another luciferian intellectual.
Wow nice. Any evidence or actually arguments or are we supposed to just be agreeable to your unfounded arguments and go with whatever you say? Feel for you?
@@DanielColageo watch the debate, and watch JP act insane often
@@wadebacca good argument.
@@DanielColageo you asked for evidence “or an argument” not “and an argument”.
When will the full episode be posted to TH-cam?
I think Matt said it will in about a week or two.
@@jamesprumos7775 it's up now 😌
jp says this but doesnt give any examples btw
Says what?
of?
Your comment is empty and vague.
Here's an example "oh I guess we're trying to argue that vaccines aren't vaccines now".
Prayer cannot make the world 100 times better because it doesn't do anything, you are talking to an imaginary character.
Prayer works as a placebo.
@@aaronpannell6401 Please demonstrate with research? Again there was a quantized statement made, that the world would be 100 times better. Where is the evidence?
@stevengoldstein114 I never said it would be 100 times better, and I never said that prayer actually works. Do you know what a placebo is?
@@aaronpannell6401 This claim was made by another poster, and i am responding to it.
Better is an imaginary concept
I think Destoiny performed better, honestly. Even though I agree with Peterson more, he was speculative in his claims around the vaccine. Although it was a conversation more than a debate, so I still thought it was good.
JP probably don't like it because it brings JP back to the old times when he argued to win
I’ve been waiting for this interview for years! Love JBP! And Pints! ❤
He doesn’t talk/argue to be right? Weirdest statement I’ve ever heard. Does he hear himself talk? You speak to be right until you realize you’re wrong. That’s every discussion/argument ever
Are you seriously as clueless as you're acting? Did you genuinely not understand what Peterson is saying?
I think y'all are misapprehending the point Peterson is making. Jordan is not saying he is beyond criticism. In fact he engages with John Vervaeke in very critical ways. Perhaps a useful distinction is philia nikia vs philia sophia. Plato says there is a difference between the man who loves victory and the man who loves wisdom. And perhaps sometimes we chose the sophist over Socrates.
Socrates was a sophist. And Plato wasn't against the sophists as a general rule. His concern, in a similar vein to the poets, was how the artist was producing artifice for the consumption by the masses.
i mean that is all true except if you watched the convo the person who came off as having the need to be right was like JP imo not destiny. never once did I hear jp ask destiny to explain why he thought certain ways instead he would jump in and try to correct him. it felt like jp wanted to win an argument, not discuss wisdom.
@@josephpercy1558 Socrates was not a sophist.
That's how JP behaved though, not Destiny. This is pure projection.
@@bradders9743 Lol how? Name one thing he did.
Being emotional doesn't mean you're trying to win over trying to find truth. Peterson was engaging with what Destiny was saying in a differentiated and good faith way. Destiny did that too, but sometimes he got passive-aggressive, or didn't really address what Peterson was saying, etc.
I mean I think most of us learned by like 10 years old that just because someone is calmer doesn't mean they're necessarily being more honest or straightforward in a discussion.
There are a few people that I would say are on 'team truth.' People that want to be logically consistent and follow the facts where the facts take them rather than selectively use the facts to construct a narrative.
At great social cost Destiny has shown himself to desire to arrive at the truth rather than 'be right' time and time again.
I used to be a huge fan of JBP. However, since he came back and decided to affiliate himself with the Daily Wire he has become increasingly partisan. I believe his partisanship often interferes with his ability to view things clearly. This is particularly clear when looking at his presence on Twitter/X.
I don't blame him for this. As a public intellectual he has unjustifiably received more criticism than anyone. However, I think this has grated on him and made him increasingly sensitive to criticism. To the point where he overreacts and goes in the opposite direction.
Respectfually, I disagree with his analysis of Destiny.
I have always had the impression that Destiny just wants to win these debates like a duel, a match. He is not a truth seeker. I knew an extremely intelligent guy for most of my life and his debate tactics are basically like Destinys. After some time it just gets boring and frustrating.
I think the turning point for Jordan Peterson was when Destiny said redistribution was not a problem in the soviet union AT ALL (especifically relating to the kulaks) earlier in the conversation. Which is such a ludicrous statement, making Jordan see Destiny as being of bad faith and saying things for the sake of being a contrarian. After that you could see his atitude shift and he became more heated.
Destiny was just being technical, redistribution of wealth happens in modern societies too, but they are fine in our eyes. The main problem with the soviet union was its command economy, this was brought up in the debate.
@@Xakanis Redistribution was a big problem that caused mass starvation. Was it the main problem? Maybe not. But Destiny said redistribution was not a problem at all. Redistribution can absolutely be a problem in of itself if done wrong and should be approached carefully. But destiny dismissed it
I think peterson has a blindspot to the overreaches of his own intelect because he has a good intellectual understanding of its lucifarian pitfalls and thinks himself immune because of this. Understanding and integration are seperate things though. There is abit of irony here.