Greatest Moment In Pangburn History? Jordan Peterson
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 24 ส.ค. 2023
- #jordanpeterson #mattdillahunty #god #atheism #christianity #jesus #bible #jordanpetersondaily #jordanpetersonclips #atheist #jordanpetersonquotes #debate
Watch full discussion here: • Does God Exist? Jordan...
The Warrior For Reason - Matt Dillahunty goes head to head with Dr. Jordan Peterson on God, Religion, Morality & more! - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![[TH] 2024 PMWC x EWC Main Tournament Day 1 | PUBG MOBILE WORLD CUP x ESPORTS WORLD CUP](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/f5Coja1zCzo/mqdefault.jpg)
Drop a like if you enjoyed the video! New events coming this fall! Full discussion here: th-cam.com/video/9nQUg4QeI_Y/w-d-xo.htmlsi=DkGIiRy8XGdMFnGi
It would've been more fun if Matt started calling Jordon a f..king idiot like he does before he hangs up on his Atheist Experience callers; lol!
I never like videos that include that apologist Peterson. Rational minds like Matt's see right through JP's methods and motives. Oh you meant approve of your upload. I do.
That anyone thought JP did well here is delusional.
Peterson's approach throughout this entire clip is to continually throw out tangential arguments and never let Dillahunty get to the end of addressing any one of them. This is obfuscation and it is deliberate. He knows he will be humiliated if Dillahunty is allowed to clearly address anything at all. Peterson comes up on my TH-cam feed all the time, but I've long since stopped watching him. He never has anything of worth to contribute
@@martinsutoobThat's his entire brand. Equivocate, obfuscate, and shroud everything in pseudo-intellectual gibberish. His conservative cronies don't have a clue what any of the things he says actually mean, so to them he just sounds like a genius making really hard-hitting points. Meanwhile, actual philosophers like Matt can see through his bullshit like glass.
Jordan says, "you sure you wanna go there?"
...proceeds to never go anywhere
JP: you sure you wanna go there?
also, JP: define "go"
Jordan Peterson was truly exposed in this debate. Dillahunty's best performance ever.
And since then Peterson never talked with Matt again…
Instead he preferred to surround himself with people who constantly tell him how smart he is.😂
Jordan: “I shall attempt to sound intellectual”.
Matt: “I shall make sense”.
Mind Begs the Question:
To support and aid an Apartheid State
Righteous,Evil?
@@HumanBeingsRThinkingBeingsEvil. Next question?
It's hard to make sense when talking metaphysics and clearly unlike Jordan the atheist isn't being receptive.
@inoderlulzer5163 Oh, poor baby! Wasn't the mean old atheist being receptive enough to you? Oh, that's so mean!
Have you read the theists' comments in these discussions? They usually have NO argument except to repeat nonsense like god said blah blah and atheists are bad people!
They don't seem like even college graduates, let alone scholars.
And their hypocritical posing that they just care so much!They just want to HELP us, and it isn't at all about their chauvinism and their ego, no, not at all!
@inoderlulzer5163 Jordan, receptive? Are you deaf AND dumb? I dare to find a clip in which he doesn't interupt the other person!
I love how there moments when JP thinks he has made an incisive point and is 'winning', but is fact humiliating himself in front of an audience who are laughing at his childlike idiocy.
What exactly is idiotic? I thought the audience behaved like they were in some talk show.
@@inoderlulzer5163much of Peterson’s argument was either idiotic or straight up nonsensical
JP’s ceaseless interruptions, dismissiveness and glaring arrogance are just some of the reasons I’m baffled anyone would be willing to pay to listen to him.
there are plenty of poorly educated folks who, upon hearing "long words" are so mystified that they are entirely taken in....or more likely they do not wish to seem stoooopid and so go along with it all (The Emperors New Clothes) attaching oneself to another who appears clever, might just make one look smarter than is actually the case.
Some people sadly see this as argumentative power, the ability to cut through someone else and blast them with words and oppositions faster than an AK47. Ben Shapiro is a master of this art too, perhaps even more so than Peterson.
Basically if you can outspeak your -fellow debater- opposition/enemy, then you can steer the conversation through endless tangents and rabbit holes of whatifs and whataboutism, and speculative undeniability as foundation for anything that could counter his own words. It's a strategy that captivates an audience easily if the opposition is not as intellectually calculated as Matt is, who can articulate and cut through the bs without losing their train of thought every 2 seconds.
@@Real_MisterSir Yes indeed. I call it "argument ad motormouth".
deflection sounds like intellect to the stupid.
Same rationale that people have for why they believe Trump or Putin or Kim Jong Il. Mainly fear based reasoning.
They think it's in the best interest of their well-being to support those people.
The difference between Matt who actually uses logical reasoning and Jordan who merely convinces mediocre thinkers that he uses logical reasoning.
JP just doesn’t shutup and idiots think that’s the sign of a great kind..
Peterson is the dumb guy's smart guy.
He uses such big words, though. Doesn’t that mean he’s smart?
@@DARKEMERALDFLAME hahaha. And you think Matt is smart. You guys are a joke.
@@danielbond9755
Really?
Your ignorance and gullibility is very distressing!
Look at the body language of the two. JP is hunched over, frowning, fidgeting, and constantly interjecting. Matt is sitting in his chair, legs crossed, face is calm, and showing immense patience. This alone gives away the dynamic.
He has the body language of a scheeming landlord in a Dickens story here.
@@Myrzghe true he does
@@MyrzgheRight! It does describe Peterson.
@@Myrzghe He looks like he took something before the debate, seems super high
@@gutomouvillenahhh it looks like he’s withdrawing from something
I'm actually baffled that Matt didn't throw Jordan off the stage. 😂
This is the finest performance by Peterson...he demonstrates with every fiber of his being, from defensive body language to dismissive and condescending tone and remarks, that he is terrified that he will lose this argument...and lose it to "some guy from the internet". Matt Dillahunty really brought his A-game to these meetings...Peterson's pride and ego are under assault by an "uneducated nobody" who is kicking his ass across the stage. Bravo Matt.
Couldnt agree more, but I'll 'ave a go. Peterson is digging a metaphysical hole he is desperate to hide in, but it doesnt exist.
Not quite. He and the other are clueless of consciousness, They are Western dualists...
Consider Sri Ramana...
yes, he looks very uncomfortable and insecure...I feel for this dude, he has got himself into something he can not manage and is not good at it. It blows my mind how many people pretend to understand and find him "Saving their lives" ...he is a joke...a bad one
Absolutely right. I've been a fan of Dillahunty for years having watched him as one of the hosts on the atheist experience call in show out of Austin TX.. I knew just how lethal he could be with regards to well reasoned argument, logic and street epistemology. He's truly an amazing individual in light of the fact that he had so little exposure to formal higher education. Matt really rose to the occasion and shined here.
Would love to see another one between these two. Or perhaps one between Alex O'Connor (the cosmic skeptic) and Jordon Peterson. I have tremendous respect for Alex as well.
God he was so fucking insufferable. Interrupting almost every 5 seconds and being a condescending prick, and a condescending prick that lost the debate.
Peterson is just obnoxious, Matt couldn't get his whole thoughts out without constantly getting interrupted.
Peterson is nothing more than a "Master Of Bluff". You are absolutely spot on . Peterson found the wrong man to argue with. I find Matt one of the most intelligent guy around.
I wish to tell Peterson , my morals comes not from any religion but from having a conscience, compassion and empathy the most important and unique attributes that set fully fledged humans apart from the rest of the animals.
It is obvious Peterson is devoid of these important attributes and relies entirely on religion for his morality and behaviour. Pathetic.
Reply
Fortunately Matt used that to his advantage but yeah that was frustrating
But Matt played him really well! He had answer for every interruption of JP.
@@lawratify bluff, pathetic, obvious...? elaborate... cuz where do u think u got ur conscience, compassion and empathy, sir?
@@janbuyck1 not very good ones tho ;) lots of assumptions about whats "self-evident".. seemingly forgetting quantum mechanics, metaphysics, Descartes, consciousness debate and so on; a set of rule of thumb, propositions arent the bedrock of truth... - reality isnt epistemology by folksonomy
How is anyone still treating JP as if he’s an intellect?
I never did. Intelligent men never do. He is an average IQ man with great wordsalad and high vocabulary. He mostly says nonsensical stuff masked in fancy word.
"Except if you're dead you aren't being so there is no well-being." Right on bro.
That's a presuppositions and you're implying that is actually true, obviously I don't mean you I mean Matt but if you agree then you are as well. Christianity is true then you die and you are still being so
@@CFoCMinistries lol, the presupposition there champ is 'Christianity is true'. Lol, what a joke.
The assumption is that it’s better to be alive than not alive.
@@CFoCMinistries After death there literally is no being, that is like the whole USP of death, man. Come on man! don't go all peterson on this, it is pretty simple.
@@Pantherazure Also, if there is a christian afterlife, you either suffer for eternity in hell or you become an apathetic robot who doesn't care about any of your loved ones' suffering if they end up in hell and you worship the god that does that to them for eternity. Both are equally terrifying. So yeah best is don't die!
I used to be a JP fan. Then i watched this discussion in detail and i started to question.
I eventually found him talking on something that i happen to be expert on. Something i have dedicated my career on. His take on it was completely 100% wrong. He was talking with such authority and confidence as well that anyone who wasn't an expert in the field would believe it.
It opened my eyes. Be careful who you accept information from and keep a sceptical mind.
Do you mind telling me what the subject was?
I was dissapointed by this debate. The whole time it seemed like they were talking about different concepts.
Peterson was coming from an angle why it is good to live live as if God existed while Matt was arguing how you can’t prove the existance of God.
Both of them were right in their own way, but as someone who watched much of their content I thought both of them failed to tackle other persons arguments in a real and thoughtfull way.
@@mrdanforth3744 PH.D in bullshit.
And he misunderstands scepticism in my opinion. We must at least agree on a common ground. In math they are called axioms. I could be a brain in a vat and nothing outside of me exists. But in order to have a meaningful debate, we both have to agree that we both exist in a real world. Solipsism leads nowhere. Or a more mundane example. We can, for example, disagree on the Iraq War. But we cannot disagree on the existence of Iraq.
And he's gone never to be heard from again^^^^
The reason Matt was so patient here is that each time Peterson interjected he was getting weaker and weaker...do not interrupt a rival when they are making a mistake!
all he had to do was prevent jp from changing the subject. that was the real challenge and not many people are up to it. hence jp' has career.
Jordan Peterson answers questions with questions or propositions which he wants Matt to confirm or deny. When he is uncomfortable he will ask another question to disguise the fact that his last question was irrelevant and will usually move slightly further off topic to try to unbalance Matt’s reply. Well done to Matt for keeping the replies controlled and generally on point when Peterson tries to derail him.
Possibly one of a Petersons most bizarre debates.
He lost a lot of credibility.
Well done Matt in your ability to bring clarity to the fog that Jordan tried to bring.
🍻
Dillahunty: "choppy off someone's head is contrary to their well-being." Jordan: "It depends on how you define well-being." This is why people find Jordan pompous and irritating. Everyone needs to define every word....and then define the words in the definition...before he surrenders.
and then he says one or more words have a different meaning (that he probably made up) and that's why god is the explanation to everything.
But you'll notice it's only on the subject of religion
pompous because you need to define words rather than appeal to emotion?
@@ithurtsbecauseitstrue What do you mean by you?
@@ithurtsbecauseitstruewell it depends on what you mean by 'appeal' and 'emotion'
Peterson is NOT all ears... he's all mouth. Let Matt speak.
It’s the hubris that comes with his role in life. He assumes everyone is stupid.
@@bobrobertson9547 or just assumes no1 truly knows? (despite what they claim) u know like Socrates?
hefty dilemma when Matt speaks spuriousness tho right :P? like his position is the default atheist one and its known; how it can b defeated is more interesting; so JBP's response is generally more interesting cuz it isnt generic/widely disseminated
@@zacke6 Yeah, and where are the parameters of ‘knowing’? Rational thinking would suggest it’s a constant. Lets be frank, JP has fallen on the side of God and yet, he has no evidence for it, which conflicts with his own stand point. He’d be the first to argue that you have no valid argument unless its provable? So Jordan, you have questions to answer.
@@bobrobertson9547 We all have to start from the Socratian baseline of NOT. KNOWING. ANYTHING. Then we start assuming; "Evil-Demon"-/Simulation-theory/? Maybe. Physical Reality? Maybe. (quantum physics, any1?) Even more foreign types of True Being that gives rise to our current xp's`? Maybe.
A good parameter for "Wisdom" however, is "what works". But truth is even deeper than wisdom. The problem w/ propositionary philosophies is they're vulnerable to the infinite regress that JBP is displaying.
But in the end; these trails people have blazed up the Hill of Veracity, all have to be honestly pondered; w/o presuming self-evidentiarity! Metaphysics and all! Nothing can be thrown out not even The Flying Spaghetti Monster, man; thats what true humility irrevocably dictates; Were talking multiverse-lvl possibilities here; We have NO IDEA how weird (OR MUNDANE) life the universe and everything truly is :P It might all come down to 42 after all and both of these guys were wrong ;)
Considering how we cant truly KNOW metaphysics aren't (hard evidence of what happens when we die/where consciousness is etc, is scant!) - We have to look to our old friends; The Indications! Here aiding judgment not of what we can "know"(if literality was a law this word would be illicit), but instead what we can BELIEVE!
Cuz how does NOT Deep Epistemology dictate faith?? How is actual agnosticism real when u have to assume to be able to do anything?? How can u escape assumption, Socrates? You can harp on about "self-evident" all day long but inescapably; thats just interpretation, and how isnt interpretation assumption? cuz why (-if not by faith in the axioms-) do u chose certain assumptions over others?
Logic doesnt compute without data to work with, and data = TRUSTING/Believing ur+others senses :P, no? And humility vs arrogance of insta-shunning entire classes of un-disprovable possibilities...?
Despite what an ingrained habit of subtle assumption can obfuscate; Matts Moral Rules of Thumb aren't really bedrock... He starts with them sure but that start is by no means@Tile 1...
Ask Feynman too, man; its all probabilities!
I love how Peterson only has 1 argument, interrupt, change subjects, sow ridicule and promote frustration. Matt, on the other hand is calm, rational and keeps on going at the same speed, same tone, same pitch and never rises to this 1 trick pony. Matt Dillahunty must have bugged the hell out of Peterson (pun intended), but even in doing that refrained from the smugness that oeterson projects even when losing both the argument, and any remaining self respect ge still has. A true masterclass, from a true modern thinker
Mr Peterson always looks and sounds very unwell.And talks in circles.
That just depends on how you define 'unwell'
🤣@@Pantherazure
Peterson made some good points actually. Matt countered them masterfully of course but they were good points nonetheless.
He may have made some good points, anyone can make some good points. Sadly, he made a lot of bad ones, really bad ones, which damage not only his credibility, but make any good points far less impactful. I'm not even sure he made 'many' good points, but that usually indicates a difference of opinion and perspective, and is not a right or wrong issue (just my opinion and happy to be educated)
The techniques JP uses when he gets a question he cannot answer, to stall for time, are transparent. This is what happens when a dude whose clear and singular goal has become the accumulation of money decides to profess expertise broadly outside his training and education. Lots of videos, lots of hot air, lots of pulling things out of his you know what. But all delivered with a patronizing superiority and conviction, no matter how undeserved.
Jordans wife "Jordan, can you please pick up some milk on the way home?"
Jordan "well that depends on what you mean by home..."
and milk, and pick up, and can, and you
Matt’s patience in this debate was godly…
i see what you did there..
Jordan Peterson epitomizes what a stupid person's idea of a wise man is. He's sold millions of books. Truly astonishing.
id say it was ungodly.
I would say it was godly, but only if god believes in Matt. Then petersons asks what do you mean by Matt?
@@christopherwaters8822
What do you mean by “godly”? What do you mean by “what”?
I was hoping for some constructive dialogue between two people. However it was Matt trying to get enough space/time to explain his position and Jordan Peterson acting like a five year old asking for a cookie while his parents are discussing a death in the family.
How exactly was he acting like a 5 year old? 5 year old's aren't deeply entrenched in ideologies which cause them to constantly talk in circles, be verbose and make empty arguments constantly interrupting someone attempting to answer the questions they just asked. They're more likely to actually listen than Jordan is, more likely to be more open-minded than him and won't pounce on everything you say with word salad and asking you to re-define your terms, if Jordan was acting more like a 5 year old, he'd have been more open-minded, curious, willing to wait two seconds on the answer and not as deeply entrenched in his ways.
WOOF. Great showing from Matt! Its pretty obvious Matt's spent the better part of his life exploring ideas and debating them with religious callers on his various shows/podcasts. I really admire his quick thinking and ability to maintain the throughline on his point in the face of the distraction tactics from JP.
After this discussion, I stopped caring about Jordan Peterson. He is clearly just making things up and does not seriously debate. No logic. Just mirror fencing.
He always been good at coming across smarter than he is. Then when he took oil lobby money yo give opinion on things hes not qualified about for cash. He's a fraud who needs to take his own advice and clean his room.
"mirror fencing'. i like it.
@@ConcedoNulli we works for the daily wire... it's not hard, they take Koch money which is in bed with exxon money. You can google it, he even admitted himself he was repeating singers works who is also a paid for opinion shill like JP. He works for the daily wire which takes funding from Koch bros, breitbart and tpusa which all take money from heartland which are exxon mobile funded think tanks. It's always seperated by two or three degrees to give their Stan's enough of an excuse to turn a blind eye to the fact these millionaire sell outs got rich by being puppets of billionaires. Jp is a psychologist yet he constantly offers his opinion on things like cc when he has no credentials on it and hooked on Benzos. Time for him to clean his room.
I don’t see how you all come to that conclusion. He is very logical. Well established in his thought process and takes great care in his choice of words generally. As nobody is perfect. He bridges the gap between the spiritual and the metaphysical with his breakdown of art, literature and science. Pretty amazing mind. And has over and over stood up to the critics and many great minds of our era.
"clearly"?? so ur just assuming then? questioning how ur opponent knows something isnt real debating?? Matt blurts common, subtle micro-assumptions as if self-evidently true.. but stopping to ask about that and the subsequent denial is "cringe" and "making things up" :P?
That made Jordan look unhinged lol. Never seen him that adversarial or combative before. Wouldn’t even let one point get finished.
If you think that is unhinged, you should see how he is now. Something seriously broke after he went into a coma.
hes a supremely stupid man. hope this knowledge i have imparted helps
@MoreAmerican Are you joking? He's always been that way! In my opinion.
@@AlicedeTocqueville
No, seriously. In videos I’ve seen Jordan appears much calmer and emotionally regulated, more coherent.
Cause he's in a comfortable room surrounded by like minded people answering comfortable questions.
He should now be introduced as removed clinical psychologist Jordan Peterson.
This is awesome. Very well done by Matt here. I usually find Matt to be a bit impatient when arguing but his patience here and ability to compose against Jordan here is really terrific.
Here, here….
Hear, hear!!!!
He used to be very patient pre 2015 atheist experience. I guess he's getting tired saying the same shit over and over again every year
It's so annoying that JP doesn't even let him finish before asking him quite absurd questions like "are you sure it is in your best interest to not have your stuff stolen?"
@@universecreator988As every human would be. No one can endure having an significant amount of your daily time consisting of such tedious discussions where in many cases your points don't even matter as the people don't want to have a dialogue.
I aspire to Matt Dillahunty's level of patience.
Which is kinda funny when you see him chatting with some of the callers on his YT shows, but yes, he is amazingly patient with peanuts like JP.
@@tonyclif1he has dozens if not hundreds of callers every day.
The point is to discuss stuff with these callers.
If someone is annoying or isn’t interested in having an actual conversation, then it’s only reasonable to dumb them and Let someone else speak
@@tonyclif1 Quite astonishing, yes. Matt gets so fed up with the same old religious "arguments" he will not waste a second before jumping on them. Matt patient?? Depends on the situation for sure. I think Matt was waiting for JP to say something childish like "I know you are but what am I?"
I once had his level.of patience, and then Trump became president, bringing all of the Jordan Petersons and self anointed geniuses of the world crawling out of the woodworks as if the lights had been turned out.
Talk to someone like Jordan Peterson for long enough and you will lose your shit, even if you are Matt.
In fact, I noticed Matt's armor show signs of wear when he finally said, "let me do this," to which Jordan conceded and then still couldn't let Matt finish.
If I had been involved in that conversation I probably would have offered to remove Jordan's head so we could judge his wellbeing at that point.
You should see his patience wither away on the subject of veganism in a matter of seconds
Peterson's body language clearly shows how uncomfortable he is with Matt's intelligence! 😂😂😂
I dont think he's uncomfortable with MDs intelligence. He can't just pontificate like he does with his acolytes. MD is challenging him with very simple ideas. I get the feeling MD is annoyed having to do this debate
@@Dez-E what does "MH" mean?
@@magnus_mode I made an error I meant to use MD for Matt Dillahunty
When JP first got on the radar i was like everyone else, impressed with this intelligent speaker who seemed to put a lot of thought into his arguments. Then he started these debates. And we get things like
"When you're dead you're no longer being, so there's no well-being"
"Well thats not necessarily the case..."
Add to these gems all his wonderfully insightful tweets, and you start to see that this man has plenty of education, but no critical thought
That part was awesome. I noticed that JP said "that's not necessarily the case" - which I have to say even I was not expecting. As an accomplished onstage sophist, Peterson knew to throw that out there to buy himself some time. But man, he got checkmated so nicely that you can see his face collapse for about a second before trying to pull himself together. Although I saw some interesting lectures by Peterson years ago, that one moment was so satisfying. Because he seems constitutionally incapable of saying, you know what, you're right. He has become insufferable.
@innertubez very true. I really enjoyed watching his lectures in the classroom, even learned some things that helped with my kids, but all the attention he got has certainly gone to his head. Incapable of relinquishing a point
First Jordan Peterson is an agent of Church and it is in his best interest to always showcase that the superiority of wests exist only because of Abrahamic god and not the Enlightenment Era. It seems for him the abrahamic god and the Judeo-christian culture it gave birth to is what civilized the Western World clearly disregarding the semitic religions were barbaric and still are and it was the Roman Empire that carried the banner of civilizing the barbarian and not Christianity. Hence when Roman Empire created Christianity, the civilizing mission was now associated with Christianity and thereby the Abrahamic god. Again many of thinkers that he refers to like Jung etc were engaged in learning the philosophies of Buddha.
So in this battle of Church, he seeks and calls for the unity of the 3 Abrahamic religions and Marxism(extension of the Abrahamic religion) and to battle with modern secular thought and also Eastern thoughts mainly Indian thoughts like Yoga(along with Meditation technique which are taking followers away from Christianity) or Buddhism and prove the superiority of the Abrahamic god.
In his recent videos, you can witness Jordan Peterson inspired by Jesus Christ didn't resist evil and calls for unity and asks western world(christians by identity) to love the enemies and turn other cheek.
I enjoyed the public conversation but when he hit my radar he was going off on an amendment that took away the legal ability to discriminate against a group of people
@stevencollins8348 not exactly. As I understand it (and I could be mistaken), tye language of the bill effectively compelled speech. As a free speech proponent myself, I'm dead set against such a bill. Once the government is legislating speech, you start heading down a dark road.
JP is what you get when a person reads a dictionary to replace his entire vocabulary with only the most complicated words possible.
And the idiots that love him don't understand any of them. It's one of the many reasons I can't stand peterson...he will ramble on and on and literally not say anything.
I have no idea how Matt didn't lose his train of thought several times. I would have forgotten what year it was if I was debating/conversing with someone like this. I hope folks can appreciate how impressive Matt's focus is here, absolutely impenetrable. 👏🏾💐
Thats JP's magic trick
@@Keeks749 Peterson is like a failed lawyer who constantly obstructs every sentence the opposition makes. very evident narcissism and arrogance. If there is a god, I don't think that being would be pleased with one of their followers displaying such sinful traits while claiming to do it in the god's name.
All that practice with not letting callers get off of topics and pivot to get away from a losing situation.
Matt "Bulldog" Dillahunty :p
He has decades of practice, plus he takes notes during talks.
"The rest of them killed themselves." - Utterly brilliant.
Just remember Jordan once said "what do you mean by the word 'do'?"
Peterson is like a politician, he can talk so much and so eloquently while at the same time saying nothing of value.
This is 100% my issue with him. I was told to watch him by people who have no idea what he says only that he says a lot. If I asked them to describe a point of Jordan Petersons that they really respect and agree with, they can't because he just talks and says nothing, they just have a general feeling that he supports their overall world view. He does it here, says nothing, and it's obvious; he's lost his ability to bullshit and it's really showing.
No you're right, Matt Dillahunty on the other hand is eloquent and logical. @tandme2342
Thats how talking without assumption sounds like... Most people are not used to it cuz the assumptions are soooo familiar and taken for granted
@@stuartculshaw5342 dont u think its cuz he outlines philosophies, values, examples, and HOW to think, not WHAT to think ;D? and above all; questioning; he's trying do dissect why Matt MIGHT be wrong, not outline distinct particulars of his alternative vision or w/e; remember to not look for the wrong thing in d wrong places
@@zacke6 No, he's 100% a grifter. He has no idea what philosopy is and I wouldn't take any lessons from him about how to think. He says words that appear thought provoking and intelligent but they aren't in any way, they are only designed to trap gullible people.
JP argumentative, irrational, disrespectful, tangled up in his EGO...I could go on.
Matt has way more patience than me.
Yeah but JP still made the better points
@@NavAK_86 Made the better points, to you (subjective). Were they really better objectively? There were objections to any and every premise Matt put forward. JP is unwilling to hear a complete argument from anyone other than himself. He derails, objects, and straw-mans to everything anyone but him puts forward with near perfect consistency.
@@NavAK_86lol no
Chopping someone's head off is self evidently contrary to their being (because they die) , there can't be any well being if there is no being therefore it must also be adverse to their well being.
@@NavAK_86 not in objective reality
This is what it looks like when a person who is quick witted tries to debate someone who is truly far more intelligent than he is. JP isn't stupid, but he was made to look it by a man who is very much more intelligent than he is, and who just so happens to be pretty quick with wit himself.
you're too kind. peterson actually is very, very stupid. dillahunty is not unusually intelligent--he is an average thinker with an above average sense of humility making him easily able to accept stronger arguments and the demonstrable evidence which supports it, and he is fundamentally kind and curious, both of which lend themselves to deeper understanding. peterson is not kind, incurious, and arrogant--a poseur whose pose only works with those whose cognitive capacities are below his own. that's a lot of people, but it in no way includes the average which rests comfortably above himself.
If there was ever a clearer loss in a debate for Peterson it was this one.
I've heard Petersen say some dumb things before.... but "there are artists and poets who only THINK they're Godless" has to be right up there.
He is the embodiment of pompous!
How about "you can't quit smoking without God or psychedelics" 😂😂
@@beemrmem3Yeah, that was crazy even for him.
Can't imagine anything will ever top "ancient art featuring coiled snakes was a reference to DNA" but either way he's certainly put together a hell of a highlight reel of bafflingly stupid propositions over the years
@@je7055
It would be nice to know which things he said when he was on benzos.
JP: Go ahead I'm all ears.
JP 0.0000001 seconds later: let me interrupt you for the 12th time.
I believe Matt really had to invoke all his patience on this one.
It would take a great deal of self control to not throw Dr JBP off the stage!
Yeah watching this and knowing Matt from his call in shows I'm surprised he has a hasn't popped a blood vessel trying not to strangle JP 😂
@@stueyapstuey4235 And, once he's been thrown off the stage, ask him if the rough treatment meted out to him was detrimental to his wellbeing or not, and, if he claims it is, demand that he prove that to be the case.
if u dont interrupt the buildin of Aircastles u can float away ;D
Now I know why Matt has almost no patience with his call-in shows. He has to save it up to deal with Peterson. After this debate, I'm pretty sure he had negative amounts of patience.
Matt: let's talk about cereal
Jordan: but milk is also importsnt
Matt: but this topic is about cereal alone
Jordan: you can't talk about cereal without bringining up milk.
what a wonderfully oblique demonstration of peterson's approach to avoiding public shame.
Peterson already be anxiously sweating and holding back the tears 43 seconds into this video
Probably having abstinence síndrome or something
How on earth is Matt that patient.
Never before have I seen Peterson look and sound like a squirming naïve child when faced with someone who is so much more considered, reasoned and clearly a much higher bar than himself. Perfection. Peterson looked scared, frankly, and he knew it probably before the night started that he'd be cornered and outperformed. Dillahunty is class and a joy to watch his dextirity in shutting down the various branches of crap Peterson tried to escape through. Incredible.
No, that's his let-me-clarify-what-I-meant-voice.
he really is convinced he's right at all times.
@@Fritz_Haarmann who? peterson? peterson's voice is agitated because he knows he is outclassed. dillahunty's voice is confident and calm because he's dealt with know-nothing blatherers like peterson for decades and knows all the patterns these non-thinkers possess.
Every time anyone does anything wrong whether it be they're caught being dishonest, immoral, cowardly etc, everyone always rushes to talk about how they're such a "child" and every time I look at these people they're adults so when a child acts negatively they're a child, when an adult acts negatively they're a child, doesn't seem fair to kids at all and doesn't make any logical sense either maybe he was a pathetic, squirming adult? they can be asse's too y'know? and therefore should be the one get the reputation when they are.
It's always hard to argue with someone who claims to have miracles on his side. It's sitting in front of a door that can't be opened and nobody knows what's behind it and then have to convince the person that claims to know that he/she can't know because you don't know either and therefore their claim could be true. It's very tiring and draining: pointless.
it's funny how JP never tries to prove his claim that every artist is unknowingly religious.
Kept waiting for JP's easy example of something that can't be reduced by a proposition
I suppose technically JP's right since the world has uncountably infinite possibilities and the number of propositions able to be constructed using the English language is countably infinite.
He almost certainly wasn't thinking along those lines at the time, though.
Jep. JP totally evaded that.
@@jamesrockybullin5250 you could use another language though do make propositions with. That has uncountable infinite possibilities. Maths for example.
You can not reduce the subjective experience of the red by a proposition
@@jamesrockybullin5250 you do know you can invent new words, don't yoiu?
Peterson seems really eager to arbitrarily give God credit for things.
Sounds like the history of humanity. lol
And really angry. JP needs to be right about EVERYTHING and he can’t handle anything.
And Matt's entire worldview is arbitrary and delusional
@@fipbip2794Peterson's entire worldview is arbitrary and delusional.
There, fixed it for you.
@@user-gk9lg5sp4y hey man all you need is to follow the universes laws about well being. I'm not really sure what it even is though let alone what those laws are or basically anything but hey!, It's not religion so that makes me smarter than you right?
I'm surprised that JP didn't start crying halfway this takedown.
Peterson looked higher than a kite mounted on a 1:1 scale reproduction of the world's highest building on top of Mount Everest throughout this whole thing.
You gotta admit, watching a celebrity mental health professional go off the deep end in real time has its entertainment value
'professional' is a MASSIVELY generous term to use with JP.
@@carcosa_tyrant9444 ok, nominally, although the Canadian licensing board is about to kick his ass out 🤣
Mental - sure, maybe even professionally mental, but health professional?.. Nah
@@thermionix And then he went on a podcast with his daughter to cry about it lmao. "Professional" indeed. he is only considered professional because he can cater to a following who empower him through their belief in him.. Which I guess is fair, he generates value for them so that's the definition of professional. But peer reviewed certified professional, he is not.
He is more of an entertainer, than a medical and mental advisor.
about as professional as sad gad@@carcosa_tyrant9444
Jordan Peterson. The man who can talk for an hour and say absolutely nothing.
I think he's quite clear. He says; Unless you're not an artist, you believe in God, even if you don't think you do, or the opposite. 😂
He's the word salad king!
That depends on how you define "talking".😆
Idk maybe you just don't understand. Although I disagree with him on this.
He fights like a rhetorisist - when he knows his 'opponent' might be about to close down his argument he runs away in twisted rhetoric and pulls ideas apart into nothing but syntax! Petersen is a flim-flam artist and an ardent gainsayer
Did Matt actually make Jordan nervous? I admit that my bias favors Matt here, but it really seemed to me that Matt was cool as a cucumber while Jordan wanted to run for the door.
I draw my hat to Matt Dillahunty to not punch this other guy for being so rude and interrupting the entire time
If you look up ‘Word salad’ in a thesaurus, there’s a photo of JP.
I studied Philosophy at uni. It was a cliche that if you were stumped for an answer you could always dodge by saying "it depends what you mean by_______"
most clichés become that cuz they're true though; right, Socrates?
@@zacke6it depends on how you define 'true'...
@@zacke6wow you’re so much of a fanboy you really had to comment on every valid criticism trying to defend Kermit the grifter - Peterson has a lot of your money eh 😂
@@HistoritorJimaldus explain how theyre valid please please please
@@zacke6 haha, now you’re projecting about projecting 😂 no ‘debunkings’ were present silly fanboy
I am Agnostic and I have volunteered at the local homeless shelter for years. I get questioned from time to time why I do this.
People need help. It actually helps me to help them.
Why is that so hard to understand.
Because they have been conditioned for generations that the only reason someone would help someone else is to appease their invisible sky daddy. AND because they've been conditioned that anyone who calls themselves an atheist/agnostic is someone who is like 1 step below child predator in their minds, and thus only lives for personal gratification at the expense of everyone around them.
Do you believe in a God?
@@wDoucheCanoe Can you read?
Yeah, I'm an atheist who has done volunteer work for decades. Helping others for the sake of helping them is a way better moral reason for doing it than because you believe you were told to do it by a supernatural being or doing it to avoid punishment from a supernatural being. LOL.
Because people are taught that morality and religion go together intrinsically like water and wetness. They literally can’t conceive of one without the other, which is a foreign concept to those outside the cult.
Petdderson never allows anyone to speak, it's his defence mechanism. Matt was not allowed to develop his argument.
Jordan's arguments make me feel like I'm high
Jordans tactic is to constantly interrupt and move the conversation so his opponent can not answer
Somebody should make a list of Jordan Peterson's buzzwords: "substrata", "nested in", "narraritve".
hes a bully and his fans are the broken who are easily scooped up by charlatans, he likes to play daddy and dress like a court jester.
jp is the kinda guy who is willing to debate whether having a head is good or bad for one's well being. and then goes to his favorite pseudo intellectual hideout named "well it depends on how you define [insert subject of discussion here]". he's so utterly boring and irrelevant, i still can't understand how he got so much traction.
He changed to that a few years ago. Prior to that, he was quite captivating. I think that trying to defend religion got a toll on him and he became obnoxious, condescending old dude. It's sad, he used to be such a great role model.
@@ThePrimeAcademyBG No he's always been like that, its just that you have grown up and can see it now.
Stupid calls to stupid 🤷♂️
It's amazing how much worse JP comes off when dealing with an actually serious person.
I love Matt Dillahunty teaching Jordan Peterson the Golden Rule as if Jordan were a toddler.
Also: "except that when you're dead you're not being so there's no well-being" Rarely have I seen a better checkmate vs JP. LMAO
I wish peterson would shut up for 2 seconds and let Matt finish a point
u mean finish building an Aircastle :P? not stopping the reasoning-train when u spot huge cracks in the foundation :P?
I wish JP would just shut up in general.
This is Peterson's classic tactic. He always interrupts others in a conversation
@@Manolonation2 so? isnt that good if ur interlocuter is building a castle in the sky? or is this talk for the sake of storytelling :P?
@@zacke6 No a conversation is not good when someone constantly interrupts so that they won't allow someone to finish a sentence, let alone an argument. Also, what's the deal with you going around and commenting under every comment? Are you trying to be Peterson's lawyer?
Jordan Peterson trying to debate is like the Monty Python argument sketch
No it isn't
Yes it is. @@kelvinloeb812
@@kelvinloeb812 Yes it is
(MD: Yes, but I came here for an argument!!
JP: OH! Oh! I'm sorry! This is abuse!)
@@DennisMoore664 No it isn't. Times up! Did you want to pay for another argument?
@@kelvinloeb812yes!
No, you don’t.
JP seems to be good at trying to confuse people, in this debate he lost because Matt didn't get sucked in by the word salad.
Jordan has become a parody of himself, a genuine flim flam man
My god Matt dissected him alive. Jordan leaning forward, hands on knees, hand waving definitions and trying to be condescending.
But, and I say this as a former debate team captain and debate tutor, being condescending to Matt is Jordan reading the room very , VERY badly. Matt came prepared, he's a master debater, and is showing all the body language of one who is three steps ahead and honestly pities his opponent.
What a beautiful exchange to watch. Textbook.
J Peterson never outgrew his ninth-grader-troll-the-teacher- phase and it shows... He's the sophist of our days.
Peterson through one red herring after another at Matt, and Matt still wiped the stage with him.
Matt destroyed JP. Jordan was clearly uncomfortable when he knew that Matt is not taking JP’s BS and not afraid to answer back. Jordan made laughing stock of himself.
Peterson gets so unset when the audience agrees with Matt. He reminds me of an internet forum poster that gets more irrate, the more people like his opponents posts.
The only thing missing is him standing up, holding on to his black cape, while the wind blows and then leaving saying things like ''You fools, you shall regret it. One day I'm going to be your Fuehrer.''
Remind me of Ben Shapiro when he is wrong lol
This debate is just one of many reasons why Matt dillahunty is awesome. Jordan Peterson often sounds like he's being very profound but with a little pushback and knowing the right responses and questions to ask All of a sudden some of his positions don't seem to hold much water.
In this clip, Peterson carefully avoids taking any actual positions, let alone defending them. His entire diatribe consisted of gainsaying any position Matt tried to establish. Presumably his strategy is based on the belief that if he contradicts his opponents often enough and confidently enough, eventually they will just give up and he can then claim victory by exhaustion. Matt knows how to counter this approach.
For those expressing wonder/astonishment at Matt's patience and composure; he has debated Sye Ten Bruggencate. Debating with JP is like having a bit of a friendly chat in comparison.
As a non-believer, I think it's very easy to defeat JP in this subject.
The idea that if Matt really didn’t believe in God he would just throw Sam off the stage is one of the stupidest things I’ve ever heard Peterson say.
...and WOW that's saying a lot! 😋
I don't think he's the stupid one, professor... He sat there and challenged everything Matt said and Matt had to take a hard left or right turn every time he brought something up. Matt simply didn't have a clear set of ideas and face off with a Harvard lecturer. I don't even know why they pay Matt to be there?
@@fppro1679you? It’s you, you’re the guy the damn gish gallop and word salad rhetorical strategy works on? For fucks sake, man, quit being so damn gullible so hucksters like Peterson need to work a little harder in duping you. Make him earn it at least.
@@fppro1679 So, taking a moment to actually consider the question and then answer(half way because you keep getting interrupted), means someone is not worth being there? Peterson took the shotgun approach to debate. Blasting out random questions and going on different tangents. He's the one changing directions constantly and Matt did a great job fielding everything thrown his way and putting Peterson's intellectual dishonesty and just plain faux philosophical expertise on display.
@@fppro1679 you didn’t address the statement I criticized, so why comment to me? Everything you wrote is irrelevant to my post.
I don't think Matt made it through ONE sentence without being interupted and Told what he actually means. Jordan comes from a Loooong line of gas lighters.
Matt gives the perfect answer at 9:35 to " JP's question of " why do you think your valuable?"
I know I’m late to this, but wow. JP moves the goalposts so much that I think that’s all he can do. Feint and obfuscate, try to dazzle the audience with rhetorical card tricks so they’ll think you’re “winning”. Nathan Robinson does a masterful take-down of JP over at Current Affairs, highly recommended.
Matt: When you're dead you're not being so there's no well-being.
Jordan: Well that's not necessarily the case...
Ladies and gentlemen I give you the greatest thinker of our time, Mr Jordan Kermit Peterson.
Hahahaha! It’s so embarrassing and cringeworthy to watch!
Hehehe
so u all KNOW EXACTLY what's necessarily the case? kind of like an oracle of axioms ;D? all of u? this is incredible
@@bigsquid2020 how so? ;D
JP went on to make the point that death might be beneficial to someone’s well being if they were suffering a terminal illness. That’s why some countries have enacted assisted dying laws. Not saying he right or wrong, but this video left that part out. You gotta watch the whole thing and have an open mind.
The contrast between Matt's intelligence and Jordan's clowning is astonishing.
My wife heard me listening to this. Her words, "Who is this ridiculous idiot?" (Peterson). "I couldn't listen to this for more than 30 seconds. Is he serious?"
Christian: Do you really want to go there? Atheist: Yes, prove me wrong so I can learn from it.
This is kinda weird. Petersons definition of god is a set of emotions. Gratitude, humility, connection... Like how the holy spirit is just ecstasy. But Matt is talking about a literal entity. Peterson is wrong because we can develop systems without the strong feelings of worship.
I think Matt also did a poor job defining his well being. If he had just stated Sam's definition, Jordan's argument would've dissolved
JP's definition of god is not only contrary to any theological definition, but contrary to its self in that emotions, compulsions, thoughts, etc. do not require anything supernatural to occur.
but are those systems truthful along the lines just Newton, or Einstein? or do they account even for quantum mechanics? Rules of Thumb(=Wisdom) arent Bedrock(=Truth)
@@user-pc7hb9hi9j how do u know
@@fix5072 nah he did fine. jp demonstrated he was out of his depth regardless
I didn't think I could respect Jordan less, but he really delivered.
@AakeTraak Prepare to be surprised. The more JBP speaks, the lower he sinks. He should shut up and enjoy the money he made selling advice.
Why did this make u loose respect for him?
@@Atanu Could u elaborate on this? cuz id like to call bullshit on this seemingly baseless accusation :P
@@zacke6man, you just can't deal with the fact that that everyone else sees JP for what he is, you're in every comment chain I've opened.
@@zacke6 Jordan "we'd lose the mythological substrate of our ethos" Peterson. He can't say he doesn't have faith, he has to talk circles around the values of having faith to argue for belief on behalf of his following. Belief not for belief's sake, not for faith, not for worship or dedication, but to preserve mythological substrate. He's arguing for faith without using any of the believer's arguments (because he doesn't believe them himself) and he's doing it because this grifty gimmick has made him a rich celebrity.
This full conversation was filled with Jordan Peterson masking his beliefs in psudo-intellectual misnomers for the sake of not alienating his followers. Matt kept pushing Jordan into shallow waters, where their statements could be understood and linked to reality, but JBP can't swim to begin with and he's never stood on his own two feet, so he had to keep diverting into psuedo-religious jargon, using one-liners to keep his followers feeling safe with what was discussed.
...and poor Sam, who, sadly, wasn't here this time to stop JBP at the root of his 'truth'.
Next up, let's watch Jordan Peterson cry for incel suffering and curse the cruel world that made up all these lobster-boiling ideological causes.
Wow, that was a great exchange. Matt stayed on his toes the whole time and ended with a good retort there at the end. I think he won this debate.
The more I watch Matt the more impressed I am. the more I watched Jordan the more he reminds me of a politician, presenting opinions as if they were facts
Watching Peterson unravel is my new favourite hobby
He will have another breakdown soon.
I've enjoyed this myself
How is dealing w/ mountainously ingrained super-assumptions "unraveling" ;D?
@@zacke6JP? Is that you?? 🤡
@@moragslothe6449 Honk Honk! ;)
To bad none of u actually can win the argument tho... U just think u can :/
I'll be honest. I actually think JP took something before this debate. Look at his body language. He is really hyperactive and bouncy and kind of all over the place. See him getting highly irritated too in a short period of time. Its weird.
Benzos addiction started around this time.
Likely the benzos
He's such a hypocrit. He tells kids to clean their room before dictating to people or trying to change the world and the dude is hooked on Benzos while telling people their opinion isn't worth anything becsuse their own life isn't in order.
He's a fraud, even more so when he took Koch bro money for his opinion
I believe it’s called squirming
I've always thought that JP has an anger problem.
Surprisingly JP didn't challenge Matt by asking him for evidence that he was sitting there in front of him. 😅 JP would have interjected by saying "Matt, how may I be sure you are sitting there in front of me?....maybe you really aren't sitting there in front of me, explicitly or implicitly" 😂
Peterson was attempting to psychologise Matt in an overbearing & condescending manner, but he came across as neurotic and narcissistic. A vapid impersonation of dominance, he utterly failed to think through his interruptions nor listen attentively. Matt started moving the conversation on to wellbeing, acknowledging that in exceptional cases death may be preferable but "you don't get very far that way," there's nothing left to discuss about wellbeing if you're dead. Matt pointed to the dead end sign but Peterson, being a contrarian, chose to walk into a wall. Genius!
I have a friend who are use the same way as Peterson he will ask you a question and when you begin to answer it, he throws another question layered by another question layered by another question and keeps layering those questions until you forget the initial question he’s asked you and practically all the others and it’s a constant argument of just questions, but never waiting for anyone answer. This is a tactic that people without any intrinsic knowledge use to try to win an argument.
Smoke and mirrors
Peterson really embarrasses himself in this discussion. I cringe for him totally
He did a little better against Sam Harris, but not much better. I think both Sam and Matt really exposed this guy effectively.
He won the World Cringe Award for this performance, and of course his fans cheered heartily.
I usually really enjoy Jordan and his points, but I just feel like he's interrupting Matt with straw men arguments by demanding they argue only from his vocabulary.
Peterson is nothing more than a "Master Of Bluff". You are absolutely spot on . Peterson found the wrong man to argue with. I find Matt one of the most intelligent guy around.
I wish to tell Peterson , my morals comes not from any religion but from having a conscience, compassion and empathy the most important and unique attributes that set fully fledged humans apart from the rest of the animals.
It is obvious Peterson is devoid of these important attributes and relies entirely on religion for his morality and behaviour. Pathetic.
Reply
Peterson should stick to his field of real expertise which is Psychology.
He now thinks he is an expert in every field and that is a shame.
Matt totally dominated the argument with logic and reasoning. Jordan just argues for the sake of arguing.
I’m a proud atheist artist. My most recent video is a 15 minute short film heavily influenced by atheism and anti-spirituality.
I’ve watched this entire discussion a few times, but just noticed that when Matt says his moral code is void of God explicitly and implicitly, Jordan tries to rebut that by telling Matt he values things. Well value has nothing to do with God, and value is not God. Value is something any mind can do on its own.
That JP dismisses well-being speaks volumes about him.
How can you possibly accept the god proposition which comes with the possibility of eternal torture in hell while simultaneously claiming that death is the end of suffering?
ah! that is such a good simple point, although i imagine the apologist will reframe that last senitment as 'the end of all suffering for those born again in christ'. and boom!
Its pretty interesting that in all the afterlifes of various religions there is a heaven model and a hell model....none I have come across so far had a heaven for good deeds and for bad deeds once you die you just stop existing...because that would be too lenient in the context of religion...its way too in love with infinity.
@@jimmythebold589 Or he'll define god as a metaphorical substrate for his hopes and dreams or some other word salad nonsense.
I think there are two answers for that:
1- End of suffering means end of _mortal_ suffering, and
2- You have the chance of not going to hell, so you choose to continue suffering.
None of those are really compellyng from an outsiders' perspective, though.
You do not need to look to theology to be a theist. Eternal damnation is fear mongering that the Roman Catholics invented, exacerbated by the evangelicals, its not even in the Bible. The Eastern Orthodox Christians have always taught to fear not "he who can kill the body" but rather, "He who can kill the soul". As for those who believe in hellfire, it probably just feels good to be part of the special group and most people are content to not question everything.
Peterson: "But WHY is losing your head detrimental to your well-being..? WHO'S to SAY..? I am very intelligent"