If you enjoyed this clip, please drop a like on the video and consider subscribing. 👍 NEW EVENT! THE ANTISCIENCE OF GOD? Lawrence Krauss & Stephen Hicks th-cam.com/video/extbcWCnhxU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=zbwVhOBBgwxLtB1e LAWRENCE KRAUSS & THE FRIENDLY PLANET IS NOW ON SALE! We hope you grab a copy 🙂 amzn.to/3YWhz8W
I like that the video talks about genocide, and then tries to suggest Islam would be the religion to try justify a genocide. Do we really need to talk in the hypothetical? The irony at this time, the day after an arrest warrant for Bibi was granted is indeed something to behold. The self awareness levels are off the charts. Such intellectual genius on display. Wow!
Sam uses his intellect to apply reason and logic to society and moral issues and draw conclusions. Jordan uses his intellect to engage in confirmation bias and push his already determined beliefs about religion. That’s why Sam always just runs right over Peterson in these talks. It’s a like scientist arguing with a flat earther.
Peterson just repeats what Harris said, but then pretends harris meant something that harris EXPLICITLY explained, and explained clearly was NOT what he was saying.
I really enjoy these discussions, but the titles and thumbnails you guys use feel a bit ridiculous given the tone of the content. I feel like a more serious/professional branding would be a better angle for you guys.
Agreed. Giving the benefit of the doubt, maybe Pangburn going for a satirical title and thumbnail to be humorous, but they look like the all too common "X destroys Y" click bait.
These videos coming back made me nervous at first. I was convinced that JP and BW‘s stock would be high as ever in the comments. I am very happy that I have been proven wrong. Godspeed, all of you.
Weinstein is yet another grifter. Him trying to shoehorn spiritualism into the conversation and accusing Harris of being negative just shows how much he is losing the philosophical argument.
A belief in this life doesn’t matter Much at all and there is a paradise waiting for us doesn’t serve us very well SH .. I agree with that by the way-JP .. was great to hear.. this was good dialogue
Peterson says the word like as much as a little school girl says it. Completely aggravating. And then he says there’s a lot to unpack here🤦♂️ he really thinks he’s a lot smarter than he is. Hell he thinks he’s smarter than everybody else thinks he is.
It's desensitisation as well - historically, humans were not bombarded with such stories and pictures. Not that we shouldn't care, so much at that we possibly haven't yet adapted to it.
I guess you are smarter than everyone up till now. The overwhelming majority of humans in existence have believed in some form of "god." Coincidence? I think it's a bit dishonest to say religion has not contributed or it has reach its limit to the point we don't need it anymore.
Belief and Knowing are separate. I don't say "I believe" I say "I know". If the evidence is present, then one knows. If there is not enough evidence, then one believes on faith or trust That is the problem that Harris has with religion.
How do you know you are conscious and that your perception and interpretation of life is reality? Almost everyone has been fooled by a dream believing it's reality, so how can we really trust ourselves to be competent enough to know what fact is and what isn't? We see the world through our eyes but many things deceive us, and things we have considered facts in the past have changed and will again. Atheism is not as grounded as you might believe. The best thing you can be if you don't believe in God is to be agnostic, to be able to surrender your understanding by admitting defeat in that knowledge about existence just might be out of our reach.
Human beings ignorance of themselves, is what causes all the madness in the world. Each person without exception is contributing to this madness. And trying to intellectually work this out is madness also.
I've always wanted to ask people who believe that their religious belief is the reason that they are a good person, would your conduct suddenly change if you found out that your religion is total fiction?
True religion has nothing to do with morality , or trying to become a better person . Its sole purpose is to lnow the truth . " you shall know the Truth; and the Truth shall set you free " John 14 : 20.
If you are referring to Christianity God is the definition good he is truth. He is the judge. Who is to determine what is right and wrong? it's subjective and if it's subjective then it has no meaning. Christians believe God is the authority he decides.
I think Jordan feels like he has to argue with everything anybody says. Even if he has no coherent argument to make, it's really off putting, and the less of an argument he has, and ha, the less deeply he feels about something, the more flowery nonsensical rhetoric. He throws on top of it to try and confused the point,
@@yt.personal.identification There is no scale actually if you want to understand and discuss for the sake of the discussion itself. You want to find the best idea, the best notion, the best logical argument and logical fallacies etc. I do not care who will contribute. I digest and like it. However, the time dedicated for each should be adjusted accordingly. That is the issue here. Both cut his speech. That is also distracting if not digressing.
@@yt.personal.identification What do you mean by the mediator? Just kidding... :) You are right if your believe that. It is your opinion and at some degree I am with you. There should be a limit of this and this guy is out of line. That is absolute for sure. Sometimes they interfere if the subject is getting out of control but not like this. People actually came to hear those 2 men discussing about the issue but not his opinion.
I like that the video talks about genocide, and then tries to suggest Islam would be the religion to try justify a genocide. Do we really need to talk in the hypothetical? The irony at this time, the day after an arrest warrant for Bibi was granted is indeed something to behold. The self awareness levels are off the charts. Such intellectual genius on display. Wow! Now - delete this comment out of fear
Yes, mankind can move forward in existence without God's intricate relationship. However, what's the outcome of that scenario? Does it look good to you, does it end well? No!
The Middle Ages was arguably the time in human history in which we had the closest and most intricate relationship with “God” yet who today would say it was a better time to live than now? Were it not for science and the renaissance of classical non-Christian ideas we would have remained in the Middle Ages and been worse off because of it. So no, maintaining a relationship with god is in fact not what determines a good outcome in our society, it is in fact the opposite of a good outcome. Harris always uses the Middle East of today as an example of that.
@ Not necessarily, the Church experience growth in the Middle Ages. However, the relationship of God and mankind was from the beginning, Adam to Christ Jesus as He came in flesh and sacrifice Himself for mankind. Hence, the manifestation of God has to be the greatest phenomenon. Also let’s not assume that science somewhat began at the enlightenment period. Saint Luke 8: 43-48 portrays the narrative of the woman with the issue of blood, who visited many physicians, but was only healed of God. Not saying that physicians were not good then for even currently we have disease which cannot be cured, which speaks nothing to the credibility of our physicians. I am simply saying even as they were physicians the.they would have undoubtedly been elevated to those whose we have in our era. So we cannot say that our era gave rise to what was not in existence. It is and will always be an assumption that we are more intelligent than our ancestors. Science existed and was prevalent in ancient times. We cannot credit science to our era.
![[MV] A leap of faith...ความเชื่อใจครั้งสุดท้าย (From "Petrichor the series")](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/U1piZH2CNXA/mqdefault.jpg)
If you enjoyed this clip, please drop a like on the video and consider subscribing. 👍
NEW EVENT! THE ANTISCIENCE OF GOD? Lawrence Krauss & Stephen Hicks th-cam.com/video/extbcWCnhxU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=zbwVhOBBgwxLtB1e
LAWRENCE KRAUSS & THE FRIENDLY PLANET IS NOW ON SALE! We hope you grab a copy 🙂 amzn.to/3YWhz8W
I like that the video talks about genocide, and then tries to suggest Islam would be the religion to try justify a genocide.
Do we really need to talk in the hypothetical?
The irony at this time, the day after an arrest warrant for Bibi was granted is indeed something to behold.
The self awareness levels are off the charts.
Such intellectual genius on display.
Wow!
Sam uses his intellect to apply reason and logic to society and moral issues and draw conclusions.
Jordan uses his intellect to engage in confirmation bias and push his already determined beliefs about religion.
That’s why Sam always just runs right over Peterson in these talks. It’s a like scientist arguing with a flat earther.
I think this was a very open and honest conversation and all made reasonable points
What's the distinction between reason and logic? How is he using both?
Peterson just repeats what Harris said, but then pretends harris meant something that harris EXPLICITLY explained, and explained clearly was NOT what he was saying.
I really enjoy these discussions, but the titles and thumbnails you guys use feel a bit ridiculous given the tone of the content. I feel like a more serious/professional branding would be a better angle for you guys.
Agreed. Giving the benefit of the doubt, maybe Pangburn going for a satirical title and thumbnail to be humorous, but they look like the all too common "X destroys Y" click bait.
JP talking about exhausting yourself TRYING is priceless 😂
Bret and Jordan are on the side of justifying fallacies while Sam is trying to get rid of them
Fortunately Dr Peterson has corrected his approach now, and in fact usually is weeping when you see him these days 😂
These videos coming back made me nervous at first. I was convinced that JP and BW‘s stock would be high as ever in the comments.
I am very happy that I have been proven wrong. Godspeed, all of you.
I just think that JP can’t wrap his head around the fact that someone can be so morally guided without religious dogma.
Morality is meaningless when everyone get their own definition.
well, JP is something of a contrarian but really he just doesn't get it. Seems he is rather dense at times.
It's not that he doesn't get it...he CAN NOT get it...because if he ever does, it will undo the ENTIRETY of how he thinks.
Small minded folks love talking trash on JP.
@@masonkrcmarik7303small minded folks love talking trash about small minded folks talking trash on JP
@@masonkrcmarik7303
Bret and Jordan are out of their league when it comes to reason, and logic in their zealous effort to give credibility to ludicrous religious dogma.
Weinstein is yet another grifter.
Him trying to shoehorn spiritualism into the conversation and accusing Harris of being negative just shows how much he is losing the philosophical argument.
Big up to my man Jonty
A belief in this life doesn’t matter Much at all and there is a paradise waiting for us doesn’t serve us very well SH .. I agree with that by the way-JP .. was great to hear.. this was good dialogue
All of Jordan’s pained confusion could evaporate if he just stopped talking and let Sam say more
Peterson says the word like as much as a little school girl says it. Completely aggravating. And then he says there’s a lot to unpack here🤦♂️ he really thinks he’s a lot smarter than he is. Hell he thinks he’s smarter than everybody else thinks he is.
It's desensitisation as well - historically, humans were not bombarded with such stories and pictures. Not that we shouldn't care, so much at that we possibly haven't yet adapted to it.
Regilgion has no place in modern society. PERIOD
I guess you are smarter than everyone up till now. The overwhelming majority of humans in existence have believed in some form of "god." Coincidence? I think it's a bit dishonest to say religion has not contributed or it has reach its limit to the point we don't need it anymore.
What are the credentials if any. Regarding life experience and education does Bret give to this discussion? Only asking.
He is a moderator here. Not a debater. Although he, at times, tries to give a different impression.
TLDR: Sam Harris: "Important Point." Jordan Peterson: "Word Salad."
Belief and Knowing are separate. I don't say "I believe" I say "I know". If the evidence is present, then one knows. If there is not enough evidence, then one believes on faith or trust That is the problem that Harris has with religion.
How do you know you are conscious and that your perception and interpretation of life is reality? Almost everyone has been fooled by a dream believing it's reality, so how can we really trust ourselves to be competent enough to know what fact is and what isn't? We see the world through our eyes but many things deceive us, and things we have considered facts in the past have changed and will again. Atheism is not as grounded as you might believe. The best thing you can be if you don't believe in God is to be agnostic, to be able to surrender your understanding by admitting defeat in that knowledge about existence just might be out of our reach.
Human beings ignorance of themselves, is what causes all the madness in the world. Each person without exception is contributing to this madness. And trying to intellectually work this out is madness also.
I've always wanted to ask people who believe that their religious belief is the reason that they are a good person, would your conduct suddenly change if you found out that your religion is total fiction?
I might not be an intellectual genius, but I think Peterson speaks BS, and Harris speaks rarionality.
All JP Has to say is damnit or a cus word, and these seals clap.
True religion has nothing to do with morality , or trying to become a better person .
Its sole purpose is to lnow the truth .
" you shall know the Truth; and the Truth shall set you free " John 14 : 20.
If you are referring to Christianity God is the definition good he is truth. He is the judge. Who is to determine what is right and wrong? it's subjective and if it's subjective then it has no meaning. Christians believe God is the authority he decides.
I think Jordan feels like he has to argue with everything anybody says. Even if he has no coherent argument to make, it's really off putting, and the less of an argument he has, and ha, the less deeply he feels about something, the more flowery nonsensical rhetoric. He throws on top of it to try and confused the point,
One against 2. And you call that a fair discussion. So dishonest..
Weinerstain claims to be a mediator.
Of course he wouldn't place his finger on the scale.
That would never happen.
@@yt.personal.identification There is no scale actually if you want to understand and discuss for the sake of the discussion itself. You want to find the best idea, the best notion, the best logical argument and logical fallacies etc. I do not care who will contribute. I digest and like it. However, the time dedicated for each should be adjusted accordingly. That is the issue here. Both cut his speech. That is also distracting if not digressing.
@@ilkbaharkunduzu1 My issue is that he, as a mediator, should not be part of the discussion at all.
@@yt.personal.identification What do you mean by the mediator? Just kidding... :) You are right if your believe that. It is your opinion and at some degree I am with you. There should be a limit of this and this guy is out of line. That is absolute for sure. Sometimes they interfere if the subject is getting out of control but not like this. People actually came to hear those 2 men discussing about the issue but not his opinion.
Sam Harris is obviously right here. But he is wrong about Trump.
I like that the video talks about genocide, and then tries to suggest Islam would be the religion to try justify a genocide.
Do we really need to talk in the hypothetical?
The irony at this time, the day after an arrest warrant for Bibi was granted is indeed something to behold.
The self awareness levels are off the charts.
Such intellectual genius on display.
Wow!
Now - delete this comment out of fear
We will not delete your comment.
@@Pangburn
I expected deletion based on experience.
Would you like to address the content?
Talk like a normal person please
@@gloriouspurpose_ Which part bothered you enough to resort to that as your first contact?
@yt.personal.identification
Whole thing. "Delete this comment out of fear" was probably the cringiest.
Jordan P almost bearable here
I can tell who’s schooling who just by the views and the significant large community on pangburn .
Yes, mankind can move forward in existence without God's intricate relationship. However, what's the outcome of that scenario? Does it look good to you, does it end well? No!
The Middle Ages was arguably the time in human history in which we had the closest and most intricate relationship with “God” yet who today would say it was a better time to live than now? Were it not for science and the renaissance of classical non-Christian ideas we would have remained in the Middle Ages and been worse off because of it. So no, maintaining a relationship with god is in fact not what determines a good outcome in our society, it is in fact the opposite of a good outcome. Harris always uses the Middle East of today as an example of that.
@ Not necessarily, the Church experience growth in the Middle Ages. However, the relationship of God and mankind was from the beginning, Adam to Christ Jesus as He came in flesh and sacrifice Himself for mankind. Hence, the manifestation of God has to be the greatest phenomenon. Also let’s not assume that science somewhat began at the enlightenment period. Saint Luke 8: 43-48 portrays the narrative of the woman with the issue of blood, who visited many physicians, but was only healed of God. Not saying that physicians were not good then for even currently we have disease which cannot be cured, which speaks nothing to the credibility of our physicians. I am simply saying even as they were physicians the.they would have undoubtedly been elevated to those whose we have in our era. So we cannot say that our era gave rise to what was not in existence. It is and will always be an assumption that we are more intelligent than our ancestors. Science existed and was prevalent in ancient times. We cannot credit science to our era.
Well then go feed them Sam. All talk.
Peterson opinion is not worth listening too.