The Paradox of the Times, with Jordan Hall
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ก.ย. 2018
- Is this the best of all times to be alive, or are we heading towards catastrophe unless we change course? Or are both true at the same time? And what is 'Game B'? Jordan Greenhall is a renowned systems thinker and star of Rebel Wisdom's documentary 'Glitch in the Matrix'.
He wrote the celebrated and viral 'Deep Code, Situational Assessment' post in the aftermath of the Trump election in 2017: medium.com/deep-code/situatio...
The second part of this interview, 'Genuine Conversation and the Intellectual Dark Web' is available for Rebel Wisdom Patrons: / rebelwisdom
Glitch in the Matrix: • "A Glitch in the Matri...
If you liked this check out 'How to Steal Fire from the Gods' with Jamie Wheal: • 'How to steal fire fro...
Who else is watching this into 2021, hard to believe how current this interview seems.
I'm watching 2024
Greenhall was ahead of his time. So relevant to what is going on now in 2023. Wow!
Thank you for this astonishing explanation of what is going on in the big picture.
Instablaster
This is definitely getting my favourite channel! Solid, brave conversation, no bs, only honesty and exploratory thinking. Breath of fresh air, thank you!
I cant get enough Greenhall
Interviews and thinking like this is why I subscribe to this. You guys are very hit or miss, but when you miss, it's not toxically bad. And when you hit, it's spectacular.
Erm. Thanks. I think
@@RebelWisdom LOL I really want to know who "Rebel Wisdom" is now. The guy is clearly getting something out of your videos. I'm actually in the same boat. Not everything you guys put out rings true with me but some of things just blow my mind! Thank you for putting your content on youtube and keep it up!
I keep coming back to every JGH Video numerous times..
Gday good sir, your channel is top tier
Interview Michael Malice
Thanks for all you're trying to do
Excellent. Lots to think about
Meta perspective of a meta perspective of a meta perspective... Very insightful!
meta man splaining.
Wonderful metafore in the beginning about the caterpillar super eye opener.
Thank you for this amazing video.
Great video! A lot of great information in here. Think you guys could add time stamps on further videos? Would make it a lot easier to reference when in discourse.
I would love to see this entire film as an animation.
Very cool! Catapillar. Finish the metaphor....who eats leaves to become the pollinator of the flower--a seperate organ on the very same plant. So it's direct creative destruction vs. either absolute or relative destruction. Nice.
I love this. This man is a great observer. Like watching a snowball roll down a hill. How do we integrate into this current paradigm? I think I may be the sucker.
I wish you would podcast this @Rebel Wisdom, it is such foundational stuff worthy of litening to over and over
thanks for this :)
“Toutes choses sont dites déjà; mais comme personne n’écoute, il faut toujours recommencer.” (A. Gide)
Realy very excellent!
One of the best channels on the Tube.
I’ve listened to soooo many of these talks, idw, depth psych, etc and this is by a good stretch my favorite. Also I wonder if it was the motivation for the rebel wisdom summit..? 🤠 keep the conversation alive friends, truth is emergent.
Truth is emergent, that is a wicked observation my dude. Thanks for the addition to my thought!
@@alexanderfrench9236 The only thing "wicked" about truth ~ is ~ while setting you free... it's about to piss you off...
JG on my top 5 of smartest, most efficient and multidimentionally precise and linguistically articulated humans.
He’s up there for me as well! please share the other 4!
@@alexandria5758 Eric weinstein, jim rutt, peter thiel, daniel schmachtemberguer
Can we please root the corruption out of our society so we can bring intellect and balance, as exemplified by Mr. Greenhall, into the geopolitical, business, and social spheres? Why don't our elected officials talk this way....? I hope and pray that the future generations' leaders take a hard stance in refusing the bribery, corruption, and despotism we see in power structures the world over today. These negative tendencies are hindering our collective metamorphasis.
This man is the guru of sensemaking
sentence making
One thing I’d like to point out: Anti-rivalrous methods can have downsides. Teaching a man to fish will give that man the capability to compete with you in the same ecosystem, which could lead to the tragedy of the commons. On the other hand, it could garner you an ally that could help steward that ecosystem. There are both possibilities here. The choice between these two outcomes would depend upon the sense-making apparatus in the dominant paradigm generated by the dominant cognitive architecture. I hate to say this, truly, but have to give the devil his due. I unfortunately do not know how to resolve this issue beyond resorting to myths around direct experience. This would require the capability of returning to the chaos of direct experience, and then being able to encapsulate some particular chaos into useful local structures. Unfortunately, I’m not sure how many people are actually ready and able to do this, which feeds into the issue of societies becoming more and more complex, excluding an increasing amount of people. One would have to hope for the virtues of those capable of doing this and watch for signals that confirm or deny this, which is difficult. It seems ethics will become a strong focus in the coming years, which would balance out the focus on science in the previous couple centuries. This is merely an aesthetic point though.
What is referred to as "the tragedy of the commons" thans to Hardin's complete misunderstanding of commoning which is a form of governance, should more properly be referred to as the tragedy of the completely unregulated market. See the enormous volume of work on commons management dating back to Elanor Ostrum in the 1980s.What Hardin described was a free for all world populated by a bunch of completely self-interested actors. for thousands of years and increasingly today particularly with respect to commons based peer production, commons have been managed with no tragedies (ostrum recieved the nobel for her characterization of the rules by which physical commons such as forrest ecosystems and fisheries have been managed for centuries). A commons, unlike what Hardin was writing about consists of a shared resource and a group of people who depend upon and steward that resource and a set of rules and norms that govern usage and nurturing of the resource with increasing penalties for violation
So far this has been my preferred comment. I actually have endearing "faith" in non rivalrous methods. Even strong competitors mostly abide sportsmanship. Humans could manage a much nobler extinction than "mutually ensured destruction". I feel we've been on anti rivalrous training wheels for our entire run as homo sapiens. We've
even decided to label our highest social system a "civilization".
I, of course, am Ill prepared to compete. Uneducated and in relative poverty. So I can and would like to admit, to assure that the likelyhood of my easy utopian way out is in some ways and maybe many weak. Also irresponsible and inhumane if forced upon finding its flaws.
I'm writing due to the interest in the tone (signal) I felt from your carefull wording and vulnerability in letting On that you yourself have an internal allowance for your own possible subtle detrements or confusion regarding the deep complexity matched to high stakes.
Confusion is a strange place to meet . I sure feel good speaking to a person of a careful perspective solidly different from mine without feeling condemned by him.
Thank you.
Bravo!
We should all develop what Ernest Hemingway called “a built-in, shockproof crap
detector!" Greenhall and Fuller both, obviously, have one. Alfred
Korzybski (d.1950) would have supported Rebel Wisdom while also cautioning
about the high levels of abstraction used by all of us!
This is the kind of discussion Korzybski would have appreciated. And a
familiarity with the principles of his "general semantics"
("Science and Sanity," 5th Ed., 1994), and other work, would help us
all to better avoid much of the current age's unsanity, anger and confusion. To me general semantics is the study of “semantic reactions,” i.e. human reactions
(at all levels), to language and other symbols. Look him up!
Jordan Greenhall, or more accurately his ideas, have been a favourite for a while now. Thanks for this, Rebel Wisdom.
I like the intelligence + accessibility of Rebel Wisdom. They're having broader and deeper conversations than most of the IDW crowd, but are much easier to follow and understand than the even deeper conversations being had on, say, Emerge Podcast or Catalyzing Coherence, which can sometimes make me feel a bit stoopid (though I still love those podcasts precisely because they're interesting as well as challenging).
It's "time" to PUMP UP THE VOLUME
Wow .. Going to have to watch this one again to. Clarify some of the points.. I think that as far as I can gather the modelling aspects of civilisation portrayed here work well at least for me .There does however seem to be a slight ideology associated with 'game b ' which tends to under consider the role of individual phycology in the ongoing cultural narrative . This is where Jordan Peterson's Input would I'm sure. Find fault if he was to comment . I mean this with particular emphasis the inevitability of hierarchical structures in humans which to a large degree constitute a 'rivalry trait' fundamental to progression .
Definitely one of the deepest and most coherent analyzes out there, a bit sad to see that all of this boils down to a snake oil website, I hope that's just a beginner's mistake.
I can't make sense of that part, either. But it shouldn't nullify what they talk about here.
If we go back thousands of years we find the same structures and dynamics playing out as we do today.
Take 2500 bc Egypt for example, there was a hierarchy that used labor to build highly advanced pyramids and other high quality stone monuments.
Today were are doing the same thing just with more advanced technology.
The hierarchy in place uses labor to build highly advanced buildings and technologies which advances the entire human race but at the end of the day we still are going nowhere.
We are repeating a cycle that ends in destruction and births a new cycle that advances our civilization until it ends in destruction.
The cycle is natural in nature . Birth, Life, death and rebirth are laws of nature. We are governed by them. The hierarchical structure of reality is designed to ensure that this dynamic can play out simultaneously.
So the destructive aspect is no more or less important but is in fact inevitable.
Because of this life will always continue amidst destruction.
If we destroy ourselves , if earth is destroyed somehow, life will continue on other planets in another solar system.
It's called the Meta Game and we've been re-telling the story for thousands of years: anthonymorley1.wordpress.com/2018/09/27/the-metagame-is-the-process-of-discovering-its-own-constraints/
@@ciarancarroll5888 Thanks, I've heard JP talk about the metagame but this article was helpful in giving a more defined example. It makes me think of how social media, TH-cam, Facebook, Twitter etc.etc. are changing The game.
Yes, these companies are all creating "bad games", and I can give a proper definition of that based upon the rules of the meta game.
Bitcoin is a "perfect game" although maybe limited in it's utility. Google was a very good game, at least in it's first few years, and then it become a parasitic company and new people subverted it to create a bad game.
But all of these companies are teetering on the edge of creating Game B solutions, half-in-half-out of the Blue Church.
The next generation of completely Game B solutions are not as complicated given modern web technologies as you might think. Jordan Greenhall is heavily involved in DAOStack, a solution for generating default open-sourced rules for decentralised autonomous organisations, which are Game B solutions. I myself am creating a Game B solution for ranking event and community content around niche interests, from salsa dancing to atheism.
@@ciarancarroll5888 good luck! I feel like I got a good grasp on these concepts now. It was a bit confusing first time I listened to this podcast. Thanks
There is no existential need for all large enterprises (like U.S. culture) to be hierarchical. We may be slowly learning to allow creative & innovative enterprises to flourish and be game changers.
Great video. I have a few thoughts: 1. All people of truth (Starks) that go to DC (King's Landing) and don't play the game, die. 2. The EU is actively trying to ban meme magic and online discourse outside of the narrative with the help of US internet tech companies. 3. Because of the first amendment the US Blue Church is rapidly developing and implementing the strategy of deplatforming with the help of US internet tech companies. 4. Openly authoritarian governments already control the internet with the help of US internet tech companies. 5. Obama multiple times pushed for an internet "kill switch" so I presume one actually exists and he was just trying to sell it. 6. The Knights Templar of the Blue Church is the US internet tech companies.
Since the IDW and information generally is internet based, isn't that a lot of fragility?
Brad Bilski yes. And Jordan said exactly that.
BB: "isnt that a lot of fragility?"
- Yes...and this is when the 'fun' begins
lol! true
There is the decentralized web called Solid that is close to launching. That potentially could limit the fragility to those pesky mass coronal ejections.
This is a man with something to say
44:51 I like that he notes "the *apocryphal* Polish Cavalry." It's nice to see some one undercut the stupid myth that the Polish military leaders were so idiotic as to think cavalry would be effective against tanks, when in reality they knew the cavalry would be utterly annihilated, it was just a retreat covering maneuver with the cavalry sacrificing their lives to distract the tanks long enough for others to escape the German advance.
The transition to an anti-rivalrous civilisation structure from the current structure will be a huge undertaking but the present paradigm is unsustainable. We have many generations worth of programming to go untangle. The social Darwinism mindset needs to be rejected, we need to relearn critical thinking on a mass scale and then there is the task of identifying sociopathy and psychopathy in potential corporate and political heads.
Bullshit, fight me
He makes reference to a particular curve which he calls the Bryce-Hydensmith (?) model in game theory. If anyone has a reference for this can they please let me know? Really want to find this!
Re. caterpillar eating the leaf metaphor: good for the evolution of the caterpillar, bad for the life of the leaf. Here's another example that's less successful: our box of hamsters with their nest and food, is left for a week or so without human attention. When I return, the little animals have succumbed to the fumes from their excrement and died. Thus, if we don't attend to our environment it's game over.
The Patreon link is broken. How am I gonna give you my money?
"The most recent poll showed that 75% of Americans believe that the media is engaged in over-manipulation or reckless propaganda." "Their [the media's] effectiveness ... obviously ... has less and less traction." "I expect that to accelerate because I've noticed that they [the media] have abysmal strategic sense. So they seem to keep punching themselves in the face." That is why I'm here watching Rebel Wisdom lol.
This Jordan Greenhall is super sharp cat. He will be a player more and more as time goes on, I believe...therefore I AM...
So true! Hope Jordan Hall will build rapport with Sam Harris, too, as well as Rogan, Peterson, Heather & Bret, Eric, and Alain de Botton!
Wouldn’t “religion” be the framework in which a person understands and relates to the Higher Power (or Powers)?
1:09 I’ve never heard anyone make that distinction between spirituality and mysticism. He might be right.
what the main promise, i got the deminishing retrun, that my main critique of kurzweilan singularity. is he explaining it in relation to game theory and society structure? does he predict human progress hit the top of the S curve, and we are doomed for disaster?!
The Fermi paradox in just over 1 hour. Very interesting. Maybe the only way for us to survive is to de-industrialise and become luddites?
I'm pretty sure trying to implement that on a mass scale isn't survivable either... although groups like the Amish with a long and stable tradition of opting out may persist.
If I didnt hate tech so much I'd look "luddite" up.
Really enjoyed. One question, could collaboration be a kind of Communism, an attempt at utopia. What about the fate of the non collaborative type?
His S-curve idea could be applied to so many things. If you think of most conquering armies, they are able to sustain a certain rate of expansion - but once they expand too quickly they no longer have the resources, supply lines, logistics, man power, etc. to sustain the growth - and it all collapses.
Ok I cannot disagree . do you think think this way of experience can be affective in our frame?
Need a new frame, i.e., paradigm.
Nuclear Fusion seems to be an anti-rivalry endeavor. Actually, anyone who doesn't share within my Team at work is very quickly noted and discouraged. So with complex problems it already happens, but I think he hinted at this.
Sorry, haven't watched video yet. Catching up on all of your stuff. Kind of. Within reason. My ? above was about RW in general and our timeframe
Some goods will always be rivalrous ( limited) ESPECIALLY those humans are most designed to pursue: status and mates. Tradition (enforced monogamy) provided a reduction in the one rivalry, but not elimination. And I wonder about the economies of gratitude and obligation in e.g. Roman and Japanese old cultures. Just because Americans are largely blind to such dynamics and lack the language to speak about them doesn't mean they aren't real or useful.
So here is my definition: religion is the body of the heirarchy of value which a community is oriented around. Sprituality is the attempt to generate metaphysical profundity without adherance to heirarchy. Mysticism is the ability to contend with paradox and bring the heirarchy together without reference to automatic dialectical thinking. Ideology is the inability to contend with paradox and thus attempt to bridge paradox through overextending bottom up or top down thinking.
So the answers are intrinsically and nesesarilly outside of cognisance and logos.
Good thing we dont have to know how to exist in order for existence to proceed.
A rational abandonment of rationality with severe oversight to negate magical thinking, snake oil and manipulative technicians.
No?
Non rivalrous Gathering Together. Sounds an awful lot like the Benedict option.
Didn’t know this guy was involved in Qualia lol I wonder if he is on it at this moment 😂
53:36 Dragon's Lair, is the game you mean
It seems odd to call that concept anti rivalrous, it's more of a zero sum /non zero sum distinction. Rivalries can be very useful and mutually beneficial eg a sparring partner that you struggle with and in doing so both improve your art.
but sparring would be game b, since if it was truly rivalrous you would fight to kill.
Good point. Well, I think it would be better to use terminology like competitive in relation to cooperative where you can have an obvious polar relationship that can become out of balance or require adjustment as per the context of an endeavor. For instance, the lack of competition could be problematic in terms of providing incentives, but when it becomes predominant at the expense of cooperation, it then can escalate into rivalry which can be contentious and violent to the point of preventing cooperation and fostering violence and destruction.
rivalrous refers quite specifically to the fact that in the predominant system we live under( driven exclusively by scarcity ecconomics which is embodied by the creation of money as interest bearing debt in a context of complete enclosure in which all the nescesities of life can only be had in exchange for money which is scarce by design), It is impossible for me to win unless someone else loses. competition can be funto be sure, and it is a part (at least locally) of the dynamical process of evolution. But, just as competion misses most of the story behind evolutionary dynamics in biology, running a society based purely on competition leads ( as we so clearly can see now) to inherently self-terminating dynamics
A sparring partner is cooperation in the context of rivalry. It borders on innovation.
Read some carl schmit.
This has more to do with style than math.
Amor fati.
1:10:27 - the state of modern science
I dont know about the "anti-rivalrous". Rivalry is an expression of evolutionary mechanisms. Evolution insures it's own relevance: it's a self-perpetuating mechanism which inevitably selects its most selective expressions. What I think is "naive" about Jordan's assertion is that he presumes that security and the fulfillment of biological needs is "Enough" for mankind; that happiness is a question of purely material resources and psychological guidance. Whereas the need for competition is one of those needs and it is essential for sustaining meaning, ontologically speaking. In other words, that if everyone just had enough to eat and pornhub - that competition for access to goods and resources and reproductive opportunities would become obsolete, but I think this can already be seen evidently to not be the case. And regardless of environmental changes or requirements the basic blueprint of human morality will not change, imo because it is predicated upon the conscious rationalization of the instincts which have no logical basis and is therefore condemned to exist within a paradox. It can therefore never fully shed its anti-rational components, because it relies on them to buttress the framework of meaning built on a fundamentally a-moral will to exist.
Except the caterpillar devours everything while it fits into it's very established and balanced niche in the world. There are predators to keep it's numbers down, for example. Humans don't appear to be acting a balanced role in this same system that the caterpillar exists in.
He keeps missing a very important point, I'd say CRITICAL point:
Describing a thing or problem or issue is NOT solving the issue... perhaps he counts on the idea that once you IDENTIFY fully an issue people will SOLVE IT because they are conscious of it. But with the sort of complex issues he DESCRIBES that doesn't happen, in PART because no ONE person can do it alone. So he goes on about "critical mass" and such, but that is Hope in its worse forms.
In any case, the consciousness that is "being created" is not individual but like the "old" consciousness, it is a structure based on what we got to work with. This shows up in many things, like language, and its never evolutionary processes, but language nonetheless. In physics for EXAMPLE, in the past people described things as analogies or used the language of the times, Galileo spoke of pendulums and levers and such; he couldn't speak or IMAGINING a train since trains were not a real thing by then, but Albert Einstein could... the old philosophers did the same with their descriptions of the world as they knew it. So there is no way to know if we are just doing the same, or if this new consciousness is any different than the older ones. And as Nietzsche explained, We speak of the ego (or consciousness) as if it were the most well known thing in the world; when in fact we may not even know what it is, it may be a tool, a word an invention for the never ending quest of humans to say we are higher then the rest of reality and not just one more part of it. The fact is we know NOT what it is.
So he is AWARE of the things he describes, but it is still for CRITICALLY THINKING people to decide if he is correct or INCOMPLETE in his DESCRIPTIONS, let alone his so called solutions. His solutions are so convoluted that you don't ever really know what they ARE, plus in his style, he says it depends on this or that or how things develop, so how is that a solution.... the solution might just be to get people thinking in a different direction, and that only occurs if we are about to fuck it all up badly, like in most things in life.
As long as the middle class has its toys and comforts, and the poor are not starving... this is what we got.
The hierarchies will remain pretty much as they have been.
I can see he is so sure of himself, but being right is another thing... and his analogies are HORRIBLE!! ---LOL
A much better interviw to understand this things is this:
Sam Harris and Pinker
th-cam.com/video/ByGC3Vwaio0/w-d-xo.html
Neither Sam Harris nor Pinker are even in the same ballpark of diagnosing or providing solutions for the problems on the table as Jordan Greenhall. Not. Even. Close.
"Neither Sam Harris nor Pinker are even in the same ballpark of diagnosing or providing solutions for the problems on the table as Jordan Greenhall. Not. Even. Close."
Your answer is a bit based on feelings, it seems --- sentimental. You give no GROUNDS or real arguments, for it. It is fine but a distinction needs to be made, most answers are a COMBINATION of the two, reasons and feelings.
What I said relevant to your comment is,
"So he is AWARE of the things he describes, but it is still for CRITICALLY THINKING people to decide if he is correct or INCOMPLETE in his DESCRIPTIONS, let alone his so called solutions.
His "solutions" are so convoluted that you don't ever really know what they ARE, plus in his style, he says it depends on this or that, or how things develop, so how is that a solution?.... the solution might just be to get people thinking in a different direction, and that only occurs if we are about to fuck it [the current social system] all up badly, like in most things in life."
"Neither Sam Harris nor Pinker are even in the same ballpark of diagnosing or providing solutions for the problems on the table as Jordan Greenhall. Not. Even. Close."
So it is so ("Not. Even. Close.") because you just say it is... I gave that link to look at the SAME ISSUES from a different perspective, and they do give actual solutions.
Welcome to the internet ;-)
And people who watch these TYPES OF videos are supposedly the smart, critical, solution-oriented, segment of the world population--- clearly not. LMAO
We are past the point of scarcity now and into abundance. See for example Steven Pinker's Enlightenment Now. I like the paradigm of rivalrous vs. anti-rivalrous.
Only for a few. The masses are still struggling with scarcity.
Although I know it on a GUT level
its pooping out little fertilizer bombs that replenishes the earth the tree uses to flourish hence producing more leaves. no paradox, just a cycle.
does it count as time travel if i had come back here to find an argument against diversity 😁 ha! unlikely seeing the vid was damn wild as the first time I heard it... well somewhat, given how amusement rides go👍🏼. (edit: 3 diversity high points found) still learning to hold off comments till end 🤦♀️ suprisingly cool. thanks jordon.
How much did the marketing company cost?
These bots are getting obvious to those if us in the know.
You should ask for a better product or a better price.
These comment sections are going to age out very quickly...
@Ian Anderson
Start looking at the channels/profiles of the commentors. You will start to see the pattern.
These are manufactured accounts that are tun by marketing companies.
One can contract them to leave comments. You can even script the comments if you like. Throw in some good and bad to stir up controversy.
It makes the content look more popular and increases the power it has over the audience.
All the info is out there if you just do a bit if digging.
@Ian Anderson
Yes.
In order to give the immediate impression that the majority has a positive impression of the ideas presented. And to guide the conversation in certain directions.
There are several companies specializing in marketing and social influence that can be contracted for this service. They control thousands of manufactured accounts that they use to for this purpose. Most are bots with pre-set responses, but a few are curated by a marketing associate to give the impression of authenticity.
Here is a test:
Subscribe to a channel you are looking at and sign up for notices when a new video is released. Try to go to the video within an hour of release and watch the comments section.
Try to engage the commentors in conversation.
And also look at the accounts of the commentors and notice the patterns in their uploaded videos and profiles.
You will see it. They are pretty obvious. The thing is that most people don't pay attention, so these companies don't have to fully flesh out the accounts.
And 99% will never respond to you. But then another one will answer you instead. This is the marketing associate seeing you trying to engage a boy and running cover.
Do this and you will see things very differently. Have fun!
@Ian Anderson
The patterns that uve noticed are the videos they have.
Many with video games and one or two other random subjects. Just start looking at profiles and you'll see the pattern.
Also, it is usually very skewed in the first few hours immediately after a videos is released. This is why you need to catch the comments early on.
Later there are more real people engaging the comments. But they are influenced by the initial comments by the marketing company. This steers the impression that people like the topic and also the content creators can give the marketing company pre-set comments before a video is released so that the conversation is steered in certain directions.
And yes, this is a deceptive practice. Bit that is the worst of marketing and advertising.
These guys don't get paid if they don't game the algorithms to get views and likes....
Always be wary of super popular channels for this reason. Do your research and don't let yourself manipulated.
These people have a very good understanding if human psychology and they use that understanding to manipulate opinions.
@Ian Anderson
You know as much as I do now.
I haven't researched into it except for the surface examination so far. I did watch a video about it a few weeks ago. I'll try to find it and post it here.
I don't have much more to add at the moment. I am in my busy time of year and I don't get much chance to do research on these things until winter. I'll set up a proton mail account and contact you here sometime in the next few days if you want to converse and combine research efforts in the future.
Sorry for the delay, but I have a business of my.own and a full time job at the moment, so I can't get to it immediately.
@Ian Anderson
Just one thing to add.
Don't think that this only happens on TH-cam.
These "perception management" specialists are at work on every social media platform and on any website with a forum or discussion board that has any kind of audience.
Read: The Drawing of The Dark
Great little "fantasy" novel....
Wo are you to tell me what to do?
This reminds me at its core, of Rene Girard and the engine of the Scapegoat...therefore...Chistianity in its non institutional frame?
Spiritually-driven christian thinking seems viable. Religious christianity isn't viable.
Greenhall obliterated Fuller in this discussion
I think you might be on the wrong channel.
:))
Wow. A year ago. We should be dead by now. I wonder what's holding it at bay?...
Damn this channel is similar to mine,hmm, only bigger
I feel like Jordan's verbal capacity undersells the points he's making.
Collective intelligence is the collective unconscious of course it exist he did lack of Petersonian thought on that question.
What is your TRUE purpose?
That Greenhall, he’s really *brite*.
i'm thinking this is quality
makes sense
opens avenues of escape
and more than that
it opens eyes to light
which is the ultimate path with heart
evolution works
it is written
all is well
all is gain
awakening
pass me that pipe!
Computing used to be fun and interesting, but now it's getting out of hand with people like Mark Zuckerberg having far too much power for one person and one organisation.
Jordan, I think if you watched this Liberty appearance of Jordan Peterson, you could use your framework to describe the many cultural aspects that came together here (man in a state of existential crisis rushes the stage in the early ten mins or so): th-cam.com/video/S9xE-bRCgVo/w-d-xo.html
Very interesting but the last part, he really doesn’t understand religion, not even a little
Go on...
More than happy to have a conversation with you but not here, too many trolls and these boxes are hardly suited for in depth discussion
Way too short
Second half on Patreon
game a after all eh?
The small group collective intelligence noe does exist, in the follower bases of independent creators. Channels like Sargon, Rekieta Law, e.al.
Words, words... Words...
I TOTALLY agree with you, from the outside. "We" don't have "time" for "this". But definitely, MORE POWER to you. You have my blessing
Yes a great description of the various elements at conflict in our culture. But no solutions and barely any suggestion on how we survive and move forward.Cooperations is obviously needed but each tribe and camp and interests groups are intrenched
What I see is intellectual failure. The technocrats will be exposed as useless con men baffling folks with words and no solutions.
This stuff is far too complex for the average American to process. We will see the rise of Fascism then internal conflict then war with China.
Afterwards we will rebuild and survival will force cooperation and a néw consensus.
1:05:00
So what is the difference between "embodied practices" and just normal Practices or "acting in the world", or just What you do? Is he just spoilt from too much time in academia??
@@GCU-YouNaughtyMonsters
It's a mania which most academics leat or get infected with... all normal natural or ordinary shit we all do on a daily basis and RECOGNISE with normal phrases and words, they come at us and rename them with some higher sounding bullshit, thus we get "embodied" practices and "acting in the world"... instead of saying the things and action people perform in the world, or making mental things a reality by performing actions, I don't know if it comes from too much and too many French philosophers like Derrida or Camus or Focaoult... those guys would write whole books about having tea in the afternoon. It is a mania about seeing all simple things like having tea with so many layers of meaning one beneath the other that you get lost in it, and they try hard to infect the world with it all; as if seeing deeper into it you can solve the issues they SAY they want to solve: what comes next in human SOCIAL evolution. As we have seen in the past, if you get one of these guys saying EVERYTHING and all angles of a situation they are bound to hit on it by mistake, and when they do they are held as mavericks or gurus because people concentrate on the ONE thing they got right and ignore all the other things they ALSO SAID which they got wrong.
Interesting. I was on Jordan's side until it struck me that he's in the blue church establishment. His anti-rivalry philosophy is establishment globalism. His anti-rivalry vision is a dystopia. Imagine a world where nobody hungered or competed for anything. A life without struggle is nihilistic and miserable.
I am not so sure about that. We already have various ways to enjoy friendly competition and rivalry could be called a very extreme form of competition that provides the basis for the zero-sum game. Cooperation is essential in both simple and complex systems.
Is it really necessary to require and imbalance or extremes concerning cooperation in relation to competition? In an intelligent and predominantly cooperative society based on decentralized, highly efficient technology, we could very easily provide creative incentives and means to compete without having it escalate into the types of violent, destructive rivalry that, in these times, turns out to be extremely counter-productive.
So, an end of scarcity could simply allow for new forms of creative competition without tearing holes in our gestalt every so often. The climate issues we face now and the damage the ethics and values of the previous industrial system have inflicted, the issue of species survival, (ours and others) is really the underlying impetus for the emergent transition and it is presenting itself as an unavoidable game changer. Cooperation, in that sense, is vital to our self interests right now.
@@ernestweber5207 Violent destructive rivalry is what allowed us to evolve from primitive apes. I'd rather we didn't use war to drive evolution but we do need a system that allows winners to breed more than losers if we want to continue evolving. Anything other than that will be dysgenic.
Okay, underground man,
Just dont forget.
"I dont know what weapons WWIII will be fought with but WWIv will be fought with sticks and stones"
Ae
open source ecology Marcin check him out!
A moose once bit my sister
I don't think he is considering AI into this --- not sufficiently. We'll have a world of abundance but without workers to buy all that shit. Stupid Optimists say Oh but new industries will be crated like new industries were in every mayor change. Sure but they want to do this with the same system of politics, production, and social structure... but smart optimists know that if humanity has the capacity to produce lots more with much less (machines), but the buying and selling remains the same bad shit will happen, since there will not be a system, a COMPLETELY new system of consumption to deal with that, the monetary system will no longer be viable to provide and exchange things in life, and a basic restructuring of all that we have built is not likely since those in power rather kill 80% of people than give up power and control; but they themselves also have NO idea how to solve this dilemma.
entirely speculative
"entirely speculative"
hahahahaha
of course it is... isn't that what he did the whole video?? I still don't see why my "speculation" is wrong though, you didn't say... or are we going with one semi-complete sentence as an answer now??
Where is he right and where am I wrong -----or god forbid, where am I right??
@@ggrthemostgodless8713 well, he builds a framework from an refreshingly analysis. All you did was speak for others, insult people and from the perspective of one driven by fear, declare the whole world fucked. Not that you are definitely wrong, i couldn't say, just that you are categorically denying a chance for hope. Which, i suppose he did with fear. These are two seperate conversations though. Also, i think yours is a lot less original and ive heard it for so long im tired of it.
The guys that come on this show are smart, but I can't help but think that all these ideas are just grasping at smoke.
I think there's a lot of wishful thinking
Ya so stop killing are mother earth today
Can’t help but noticing that all the interviews on this channel are men. And that’s fine. But over half the population are women and some of them actually have something to say. You might want to broaden your audience by including the rest of the population. And I love this channel!
mmmm--- I listened to the whole thing, I can surely say, he DIDN'T say anything new. He is smart, as most conscious people who have accumulated lots of information, are smart, but smart in the SOLUTIONS side of it he is not; how to REALISTICALLY implement those solutions he has no GOOD idea.
He spends most of this time saying How complex modern societies are, with so many different people with different conflicting interests... wow!!
Industry, NOT "industrialised countries", need a lot of non-renewable, many level , interdependent, things to keep going; within countries there exists groups with differing interests and one or two of them win the struggle in many IMPORTANT areas of the nation and create policy... since most of that can NOT be forever sustained then eventually it "spirals" down and destroys itself.... unless we change quickly and change to more sustainable modes of living.
He is just another "Things are fucked--- let's change the incentives at all levels" badly educated incomplete man. I truly looked for new thoughts or new solutions, there is none. Enough nuance in everything he says to cover all his bases, all his descriptions of people or reality.
But ideas on how to prevent the eventual destruction of society, even I can tell you how, We all need to get along and look at the big picture, and rapidly change to sustainable energies, and we need to implement policies of
socio-capitalistic ways.... all of that and I didn't take a course on Game Theory. I do have a few businesses and I face a lot of these contradicting (antagonistic?) issues, I DON'T want to pollute, but if I stop, my business dies.... and how will/can transition to other things, and my workers??
Does this guy understand that most of the old ways of thinking about the world are dead?? Nations exist for individuals to a certain level, but the real powers lie with multinationals whom NO nation has control over, who can destroy nations if they get too controlling of their interests by withdrawing from certain areas.
Nationalism is for fools nowadays, the USA thinks if they could only export their way of life to the world all would be fine, same with Russia, same with most ideologies, but since globalization is a real thing, who can disentangle that fucked up web without a long line of bodies in its wake?? The real fight is over resources, not political ideologies, no matter what the country, they all want to control the world, but for what? Resources!! Putin, Trump, and every other leader wants that, the ideologies are for the masses.
The best greek myth is the pandora's box, there is a reason the gods put Hope in there with all the other maladies of humanity. And that particular present was a PUNISHMENT for stealing fire from the gods!! Because one of those gods felt sorry for humans and gave the "gift" of fire to them.
"And yet Prometheus not once cried out or regretted his decision."
Perhaps you can pronounce words, but can't read, you need to UNDERSTAND what you read. .... because I said,
"And that particular present was a PUNISHMENT for stealing fire from the gods!!"
Whether Prometheus cried for it or not is not even related to it... we don't KNOW if he did or not, because that was and is irrelevant, but we know he didn't like what they did to him.
The gods punish him and they gave Pandora's box to humanity.
Plus, no answer or comment to anything else I said. I know you'll come back snarky, but a real answer would be nice.
@@ggrthemostgodless8713 To be fair, it's you who's coming across as snarky. Pity, as you obviously have a higher level of intellect than the norm. This does not necessarily confer Intelligence.
Your comments come across as 'lashing out in defence', before you have been attacked.
I'm not in turn being snarky. These are just reflective observations. I suspect you could offer an informed perspective that could add to this dialectic if you can enter into it as a sharing of ideas and solutions, rather than intellectual gladiatorial combat.
Stay engaged, your alternate views are interesting and needed.
I wish you a good day sir
Please don't use CAPITAL LETTERS!
"Please don't use CAPITAL LETTERS!"
Can you tell me WHY??
I use them for emphasis, I DON'T over use them, I think.
@@GCU-YouNaughtyMonsters
The capital letters are to make sure people don't misunderstand it, because sometimes (often) people say I said something I didn't say, like if I say this guy's descriptions are not nothing new... people think I said he has solutions instead of descriptions, and a description is just not a solution.
With the Pandora's box thing, the point is that most people still think Hope is a blessing and a gift from god, when in reality it was included with all the evils of the world, though people feel Hope up till the guards come get them to the gulags, and even in that place people keep Hope alive or some shit like that.
Hope for the sake of Hope, without any basis more evil than despair. Having too much hope makes you hopeless.
And of course people think as long as they got ideas all is well, but you need good ideas to solve things, thus the emphasis on capital letters.
TDS isn't a good look intellectuals.
nooooooo nuclear power is NOT dangerous! oh my lord please don't spread more of this nonsense! Thorcon to save the world!
shallow claptrap
Whereas your comment is the archetype of depth. We salute you
@@RebelWisdom But what can he say? This guest was talking without saying anything at all! This is really dangerous pseudo-intellectuality and it is quite disturbing that people are falling for it... (At this point of writing this comment I decided to read the linked Situational assessment article to make sure I am not being impatient and close minded. I can only add to my above observation that there is also a distinct, though controlled, sprinkling of conspiracy theory).
Five minutes in - I award this guy with the using-the-most-words-while-saying-nothing title. He has absolutely no ability to speak concisely or to distill complex information into an easily digestible conceptual analysis. Very poor communicator.
He is speaking in abstractions. Perhaps you only relate to concrete instruction.
He seems more like a con-artist intellectual that has believed his own lie.
What??? (at1:25:00) "Innovation is anti-rivalrous." How is this NOT merely another Left-intellectual's effort to sanctify collectivism, the anti-competitive herd, the socialist paradise on earth where human competitiveness is suppressed in the name of humanity blissfully foregoing its innate drive to be intellectually curious and creative. Totalitarianism is anti-rivalrous, NOT innovation! If any society establishes a goal of anti-rivalry, the unintended consequence will be the complete loss of innovation except in building better weapons and police tactics. Has this very bright man never read Orwell? Or Solzhenitsyn? What great life-saving, life-flourishing, life-improving innovations did any collectivist nation ever produce?