JORDAN PETERSON VS MATT DILLAHUNTY for the FIRST TIME EVER! Does God Exist?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 เม.ย. 2024
- #jordanpeterson #jordanpetersondaily #jordanpetersonquotes #jordanpetersondebate #jordanpetersonshorts #jordanpetersonmemes #mattdillahunty #atheism #atheist #atheistviews #pangburn #pangburnphilosophy #debate #god
Matt Dillahunty goes head to head with Jordan Peterson on God, Religion, Morality & more!
(No portion of this recording may be reproduced by any means without written permission.)
This event took place in 2018 in Toronto, Canada.
![Does God Exist? William Lane Craig vs. Christopher Hitchens - Full Debate [HD]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0tYm41hb48o/mqdefault.jpg)
![Does God Exist? William Lane Craig vs. Christopher Hitchens - Full Debate [HD]](/img/tr.png)
JOIN US IN NYC ON JUNE 1st for ALEX O'CONNOR vs DINESH D'SOUZA on "IS THE BIBLE TRUE?"
Tickets available here: www.pang-burn.com/tickets
Dinesh D'Souza is a professional liar and traitor. He's arguably the worst (Far Right) propagandist in the USA.
Why can't people just say I don't know
ego/fear
If religious people say they do know certain things, atheists will say “you aren’t allowed to say you don’t know, if you believe in all-powerful God you should know all of the answers.” But apparently atheists are allowed to say they don’t know?
@@blupandax7902 If a religious person told me they don't know a certain thing, that is definitely something that i would not even conceive of asking. It seems like you've just made a strawman there.
@@tetashome It’s not a strawman, I have actually come across an atheist who asked me that same thing.
@@blupandax7902 the reasonable person aims for justified true belief. If you believe in a proposition for which you don't have valid evidence, that's irrational. If you don't have valid evidence to believe in the claim, then you should refer to the default position, non belief, until the burden of proof for the proposition is met. An atheist gets to say I don't know because they aren't making a truth claim.
Jordan won’t let a productive conversation happen
Question #1 made me spit my drink out. Best possible way to get him to actually start to answer the question we've all been asking him for years.
Ask Matt what is a woman?
There's a word salad that makes no comprehension! 😂
I stopped smoking without any drugs because I felt like it.
Good for you. That doesn't prove him wrong
@spicytoast6890 I didn't say it proved anyone wrong. I was patting myself on the back
@@iamborg3of9 well, really, good for you. I needed drugs to help me quit lol.
@@_Stargazer_. My best advice is that when you do quit, don't count how many days it's been since you last smoked - counting just means you expect to fail. When you quit, your identity shifts to "non smoker," not a "old smoker." You DO NOT SMOKE.
I am 66 years old and in my life I have had thousands of people say they gave up smoking, but virtual all said they still miss it.
Dillahunty is correct: We’re more afraid of being exposed as being wrong, than actually of being wrong. Thats why he rage quit after Andrew Wilson eviscerated his humanist position after only the opening statement.
But we’re all wrong 😂
Every statement ever said by man was a quite literal shot into the labyrinth of open space. Considering we have not been able to establish a unity nor a means to understand even our very selves everything thus far is just as wrong as every statement ever made. For if not, we’d all be on the same page
Matt likes a hotdog in his chocolate pocket!
MD: is there a god?
JP: Metaphorical substrate, hierarchies, post modern, blah blah blah
How to say "I don't understand what he said." without actually saying "I don't understand what he said."
Jordan Peterson is clear in his language. I don't agree with everything he says, but this is also a rather brief conversation, and I have no doubt that, given the time, both of these men would be able to better explain what it is they are saying . . . even to the satisfaction of those who have a tough time grasping such concepts.
If, however, all you are doing is playing the part of a mindless contrarian, then there will be no convincing you of anything other than what you want to believe to be true.
@@johnmoonitz2968 since you ask,I’ve a PhD in medicine. I’ve no problem understanding that JP uses sesquipedalian speech to obfuscate. Unlike JP I find it easier to simply call it a bunch of nonsense.
The reason he is popular is that people like you are distracted by his big words and miss the core of what he is saying, which to be fair is not very much.
those big werdz and PhD do not mean you understand jp's points conceptually...however I definitely agree with you on the sentiment that he tends to be verbose and exaggerate intensity
@@davidevans1723 You're stuck in the metaphorical substrate my brother.
@@Zion66666
From your name, I’d guess you graduated from Lucifer High, and he is the Father of Lies…
I wanna see Noam Chomsky, Jon Stewart, Bill Burr, and Jesse Ventura debate Jordan Peterson.
My fantasy is Jordan Peterson goes on Opie and Anthony back when they had a show and Louis Ck, Jim Norton, and Patrice O’Neil are also guests and they make fun of JP the entire episode
Do not put mr. Peterson in court. ( explanation of the color of a car: well, you see. that depends..)😊
My god is the best you can do to criticize jp
@@glenalguire6960what
He only asks for clarifications when we're getting into an area where peoples' understanding of a word can differ wildly
Well, it does depend...if you want the truth...how many people have unjustly gone to jail on a little detail such as what color shirt was he wearing when the crime was committed?
He's the King of Word Salad but I like him.
The left hemisphere of a brain telling the right hemisphere he doesn’t need him.
Matt hates it when Jordan points out that his world view is built on concepts that he never even considered
What amazes me about Peterson is that he says so much and yet says nothing all at the same time! Truly astounding!-- William Ockham says that if you have two competing ideas to explain the same phenomenon, you should prefer the simpler one.--
Yes! He is a time waster! Intellectual dishonesty at its finest!
I don’t think you have the ability to understand what he’s saying
@@DemePooledon’t listen to him then , he’s one of the most popular speakers there has ever been , why would so many people attend his lectures ? I guess his fans are just idiots
@@glenalguire6960 Oh I understand alright. But I'll let you insult regardless!
@@glenalguire6960 The man is dishonest and a time waster. Also, it's a debate. How can I not listen to the guy? And just because someone is popular doesn't mean anything they have to say is worth something. Hell, Hitler was popular. And, yes. His fans are morons. Have a good day, kid.
God is not a being. He is being.
where he at tho
Kendrick Lamar is not a rapper. He is rapper.
- I wish you knew how you sound 😅🤦
@@SkeptiCol_3MChildren's music.
that's a claim, we need the evidence.
God is dog written backwards.
Matt really doesn’t get enough credit for the decades he’s spent advancing skepticism and rational thinking.
Rational thinking will always lead you to god.
@@tonythomas1010 no.
Absofuckinglutely not 😂@@tonythomas1010
@@tonythomas1010that makes zero sense
@@kylewadejohnson scientists say the universe came from nothing and regions say the universe came from some omnipotent entity. Which hypothesis is more rational and why?
I think Jordan Peterson was inebriated for this particular interview
The bald dude was way out of his league here.
It’s a trend. Look up the debate against Andrew Wilson where he rage quits.
@@mediocreatbest7574 interesting, thanks!
I love Jordan Peterson, but it’s painful to listen to him dance around the issue of whether he believes in the supernatural. Biblical stories and hallucinogenic experiences aren’t evidence of the supernatural.
Why would you love a corporate propaganda shill !
Why do you love him?
@@LeoWhalen1933 Because he's one of the premier voices speaking up about the excesses of the radical Left.
@@huskypup3489 Here we go
@@huskypup3489nothing left on them. Radical woke?
I'm 2 minutes in and I can't fucking do it. JP is talking gibberish.
As a dignified Jordan Peterson sycophant, I must say the narrative form of the situational construct implies a metaphorical substrate, which inevitably informs the pathos of the question. So therefore, you agree with the specified Jordan Peterson verbal discharge whether or not your thoughts gravitate towards a conditional agreement of the other mentioned arguments.
"I took a gram of mushrooms in college and I can tell you for a fact that getting high isn't God"
Foolishness
Try taking an ounce.
How can an act be a being?
@@w8m4nan experience of all being
@@davidevans1723 meaning what!? What's THAT got to do with a god?
Was that like a minute before the metaphorical substrate was mentioned? What is it? He mentions it a lot.
It’s all about the metaphysical substrate. 👍
@@singwithpowerinfo5815 as helpful as Jordan. Thanks?
Kind of like the cultural narrative that underpins cultures. He feels many narratives have metaphors important for human existence.
@thedude-kl5zh "Repuslively verbose" is an absolutely PERFECT phrase to describe Jordan Peterson's metaphorical and simultaneously metaphysical manifestation of the verbal feces that is excreted directly from the powerfully ejective and evocative sphincters of North American male cattle.
Look within yourself and you may find answers rather than seeking on social media.
This was actually enjoyable for the most part. I hesitated to watch this expecting major frustration and yet it was actually a pleasant back and forth. Even though I align with Matt, I still love Jordan
I like Jordan, but as soon as someone mentions God he goes all in nonsense. Totally conflating what he wants with that actually is.
"Well, if you think about the celestial beings of dogmatic and pragmatic conjunctions, it all boils down to metagenetics surrounding the acquisitions of the supercalifragilisticexpialidocious nature of existence."
Uh okay.... Thanks, Mr. Peterson....
Why tell everyone you can’t understand what Jordan is saying? It’s like you’re seeking validation from the other people who can’t follow along.
More of this please
Literally all of their videos are clips of like 3 events that happened in 2018. Just go watch the whole events and you've watched the whole channel.
Alberta is not, in fact, bigger than Texas
Texas is about 10k more sqaure miles than Alberta, according to google.
50:22 I would argue that the chess analogy was bad because the Christian view would be that a supernatural power outside of the game gave us the answers to every chess move so that we could always win in that game of chess. And when you compare life to chess, well as an atheist you don't actually know if you win or lose with your set of moves, obviously you are choosing what "you" think is best. This is easily destroyed by the "objective morality" argument that Christian's would present. I'm not going to lie. I've been an atheist my whole life, but I do believe in God after many of these debates and reading both narratives. The atheist point of view always comes down to "have faith in not having faith" or something along those lines.... I don't think any atheist ever applies that logic fully to their entire life. Secular morality introduces the ability for a society to grow into something that we know is morally wrong if the bad actors out numbered the good. For example, slavery, rape, etc could all become legal in a future where people who secularly view it wrong are killed off/died off/etc and then the ones who think it's morally okay (lol..) out numbered them. "Society" determining morality doesn't really make sense. Obviously we have to look for objective morality which is just something that we know is good or evil without it being a secular opinion.
The birth of Matt Dillamonkey.
Matt said that JP's agent told him not to debate Matt again after this. Its pretty obvious this exposed Petersons nonsense. As Sam Harris said, Peterson attaches meaning where there is none. Hes like that kid that took his first philosophy class and rambles trying to sound deep.
I had no idea that Peterson had gone so far into Lala land.
You should watch the many videos of him crying while talking about Jesus 😂😂
Just cuz ur an idiot didn't mean every one is
Or him crying while talking about men
@@user-ym7ss6xb3j Ta for the info...
Give some examples
Matt’s first book will be full of pictures. Lol no, he’s smart, but he wasn’t capable of engaging in the arguments Jordan posed. Read more
MD is just not at an intellectual level where he can contend with JP
He just did.
I don’t understand the comment section
The discussion was fine, both people made points
There is NO WAY to discuss these issues in 60 minutes
It’s a bunch of godless liberals crying because they hate Peterson. 😉☺️
Most people don't understand what their "opponent" is saying and decry it as nonsense rather than admitting they don't understand. That's my take on the comment sections of these types of debates anyway
Both sides did really good. Jordan isn't really a debater like Matt. Jordan is hard to understand and many people hate him anyway so people just side with Matt. Jordan held his own very well. If he was a better debater I think he could have really pushed Matt. Jordan is in his own world at times and Matt uses weird definitions that make him difficult in a debate. But Matt can definitely lose if you know his style.
So , peterson believe a being called god exists or not ?
@@kevinmyousfi2809 it depends on the definition you use. By his definition I would say yes
Dr Peterson said it a long time ago that what a person believes to be true is what they act out,I think Matt cannot act out his claim or if he can he is not
You dont understand Matt’s claim
@@seaofnihilism4637I’m not sure they understand Peterson’s claim, because it’s gibberish as usual and not really understandable.
Surely the explanation for people perceiving these experiences as supernatural is that the visual and conceptual experience does not comport with anything in their experience of the natural world plus it evokes an emotion which is beyond the emotion they feel on a daily basis. It makes sense to then try to understand how such experiences could possibly be generated by the same world as the one they experience every day. It’s not that mysterious.
One second into the debate and Matt is already lying
“I have no idea what your thoughts are on it”… later on he admits to asking his audience about Jordan Patersons perspective on atheists, so he obviously knew JP believed in God.
"If God exists, I want him to tell me himself. I don't want to hear it from anybody else - and in case you're wondering, that includes you."
- Pat Condell -
Well God must live up to your commands, this comment is why your the intellectuals of the 21st century.
God doesn't have to prove himself to anyone, just like no president goes around trying to convince people he's the president.. 🤦 the reason you don't know God is because you don't want to simple..
@@JosephLee706 I get what your trying to say, however your analogy has a little flaw, I am not convinced that joe biden is president even with his holding office as US president. God almighty, Jesus Christ Yahweh one God is self evident. And I see it compared to showing a flat earther real evidence for a globe/spherical earth, and they reject evidence because they are wise in their own eyes.
@@JosephLee706, you know just as much about a god as I do: Nothing. The difference is, that I don't pretend to know.
@tommyvictorbuch6960 how do you know what I know?? That's right you dont!! Just because you don't know doesn't = nobody knows.. come on now 🤦 the difference is you pretend nobody knows..
Is interesting to see in the comments how misunderstood Peterson is
Expound!
The guy, whos getting old and went to conservative far right on social media influences? 🤔
I think this was recorded when Peterson was starting to fully have that illness. Here are points when he was starting to lose his ideal thinking process due to God-knows-what.
1. He proposed a situation when death is preferable to life through a story of a burnt victim; this is the situation of Mercy, but he lacks an example based on its opposite which is Justice; he could ally the Mercy example with a story of a serial killer that has to be put to death by the court to maintain civilization-this metaphysical duality of Mercy and Justice (Two hands of God, mytho-poetically) could shed the light better, which can be powerfully developed EVEN through Matt's framework of moral revision: "Matt, the revision still RELIES on metaphysics", this could lock him back into his first initiation of the metaphorical substrate, and from there he could strengthen his position that wrestles with religious issues.
I might want to add more to this, this is fun! Still standing close to Peterson 😎
@42:26 Matt has just conflated physical laws (which in this context, would be better described as 'conditions'), to being the arbiters of the metaphysical. This is just such a crass and obtuse rationalistic equivalency to make... its also the mark of a lowly sophistry.
The use of the phrase "best interest"... is a value judgement, values need value-frameworks, and also lead to a phenomenology that supersedes the natural world, ie. thought becomes the first mover, in a culturally laden context, fulfilling populated by the free will of contributed thoughts.
One man’s mysticism is another man’s surreal.
Before chemistry was understood it was “mystical” now that we understand it, it’s not.
but we proved the chemistry and its reliability
but not god being real :( soooooooo try again
god was before chemistry , but we cant prove hes real. is crazy to think
God can't be doubted or had faith in.. God is so fundamental and so obvious that "it" almost always goes unnoticed.
where he at tho? i never seen him
@@miguelcervantes5569 god can't be objectified as an "other" but is something fundamental to your being. Existence itself, reality itself, something you have never questioned or denied. The IS-NESS of the universe.
Jordan Peterson is such a time waster! Geez, dude! Can you answer a question without using a million words?
Dumbest JP interview I have ever watched, not on JP side though.
Although Jordan was magnificent, I wish he was let his thought be completed here and there. I've never heard of Matt before, he was pleasant....enjoyed this hour
I understand what Matt said about supernatural phenomena not grounded in reality, but plenty of scientific phenomena would be considered supernatural if not experimentally explained, quantum mechanics for example makes claims that would be absolutely thought of as supernatural. Relativity as well. Time dilation length contraction gravitational lenseing, these things would sound ridiculous before we discovered them to exist . I don’t believe in god, but the fact is we can say all we want about the physics that govern our reality, but we still don’t know how to combine quantum mechanics with relativity, it’s not a secret, they do not work together and the search to unify them with a unified theory has been fruitless for a hundred years. We don’t dismiss either because of this, and even if we did have a theory of everything , what established the laws of physics as they are? it is a silly question that a physicist would reply with “well we are just describing reality as we observe it’ we can’t say why a particular particle has the mass it does, or why the speed of light is the specific speed it has “ This brings physics to the same place as the whole god argument, it asks for evidence of what cannot have evidence. Same with what was before the big bang, what exists at the singularity of a black whole? Science says clearly it’s beyond the possibility to know because physics doesn’t apply anymore. Yet we have no problem believing black holes exist or the big bang was the beginning of the universe as we know it. These things would sound ridiculous not so long ago by the way,. Dismissing things we don’t have evidence for just based on intuition is not aligned with the way science works and I see the god debate as just that. If you call whatever caused the Big Bang to occur god, is it really that ridiculous to think of it to have been? I’m not talking about a dogmatic entity but I mean something happened 13.8 billion years ago to set everything in motion, and it’s impossible to know what caused it and what was before, yet we have no problem with understanding that reality exists and don’t dismiss everything without proof of the cause of it all.
From what you just said I don't know how the universe was created or wether God exists is proof that something existed. The question I keep asking is if we proved God exists what deference would it make to us.
@@chrisbingham3289 this is how I feel about it too. I think Peterson was trying to make the point that it was the deep seated religious underpinnings that gave humanity the reason to strive for more than just self preservation, but the desire to worship something across time that led us to be as successful of a species as we are. If you aren’t just trying to survive and be comfortable day to day but have a belief system saying humans are a blessed “creation” that ought to adhere to principles beyond self, big things happen. At this time it is easy to think it makes no difference, but if might have changed the way people lived long ago.
@@danpez1I don’t think a reasonable skeptic would disagree with this. I also don’t think a reasonable skeptic or scientist would insist a god does not exist. A god capable of creating this universe would by its nature be outside of our capacity to observe unless it chose otherwise.
I think we can appreciate the positive impact of religion as major organizing principles for human advancement throughout history, while also being honest about their actual veracity given what we now know. If we aren’t honest about it, we destabilize any good they have done.
Also, just a small aside in response to some of your statements: quantum mechanics and black holes sound magical, but are observed and can and have been modeled with reasonable accuracy such that those models have predictive power. Religious claims are just that - claims. There is no observation or experimentation we can use to justify them.
@@kristopherjon6496 I was saying that it wasn’t long ago that these things, black holes in particular, were completely theoretical and it was thought that they were too absurd to exist outside the mathematics of Einsteins field equations. But low and behold we did end up seeing that which cannot be seen, a black hole. The way you even describe such phenomena like its obviously a fact of reality shows how something that was considered absurd fantasy can come to be accepted as if it were a thing you can hold in your hand.
@@danpez1 Except the models of physics indicated their existence. On what basis are religious claims indicated, other than the claims themselves?
6:28 being wrong doesn't feel the same as being right. One builds confidence, and the other weakness.
This reminds me of a late night TV discussion show I saw years ago. The subject was something like the significance of god/faith in one's working life. The panel included the then Archbishop of Canterbury, rowan Williams, Sister Wendy (a nun) a police chief and some other men.
Sister Wendy let the men pontificate for about twenty minutes. No one took any notice of her. Suddenly she intervened with "The trouble with this word 'god' is that when it is used, no on really knows what anyone else is talking about".
There then followed a long silence with rowan staring at the camera looking like a rabbit caught in headlights. Then the police chief continued as if he had not heard that!
PRAISE GOD!
F ur God!😂
People are so quick to write Jordan off.. I think Matt is amazing and his views hold strong, but Jordan makes a lot of strong points here, all of which people quickly reduce to nonsensical mumbo jumbo because it’s easy for them to push it away without thinking about it. Jordan is fighting for the side of the subjective, which is pushed away by science, but is an important and undeniable aspect of the human experience. It’s a massive part of who we are. We all experience this world in our own way, and our dreams, hallucinations, mystical or spiritual leanings, all fall under the umbrella of existing within the realm of our collective experience. It shouldn’t be denied and it is important. Both sides are important. Of course no one can prove or disprove God. But Jordan is saying a lot of good stuff here.
You can disprove God. Einstein's equation is E=.mc^2*gamma. P=E/t. It follows then that P=mc^2*gamma/t.
Claim: God is immaterial (mass is zero).
Plug in zero for m.
P=0*stuff =0
Thus, God's power is zero.
This is equivalent to saying God does not exist.
@@anthonyberard3507
The mistake you make is you compare God to the material realm like an artefact on a table? Like his power is depended on his material mass. The reason God is a receding Horizon on which we will never reach is because as the “Absolute” God has nothing to compare itself to. Representing the highest ideal that could animate us through life. Whereas we are constantly comparing ourselves to our past choices, insecurities and other people etc. How do we transcend the things we need to shed? After all we are an animated spirit that can be made manifest in the world, effecting the fabric of the world around us based on the consequential decisions / choices & life experiences over time within the self. So how do we tackle these without descending further into hell like a non believer might… making those who tap in to his “power” become more like the manifested spirit of God than he / she was the previous day. The angels in heaven for all eternity are crying out Holy Holy Holy! As they discover a new facet of God that they didn’t know existed. This is represented in us as humans as we discover parts of ourself being made manifest that we didn’t know was possible. Then this opens the landscapes of how these parts of ourselves could manifest themselves into the eternal landscape of all the possibilities of experiences of life yet to be experienced in the future. All of this being possible through Gods spirit that we have allowed to work through us. How can this spirit work though us though? Well we know God has nothing to compare himself to. Where we do compare ourselves. Therefore God is the highest ideal on which we would like to be. How do we get closer to that…? It works by us confronting our sin? The Hebrew for sin means “To miss the mark” That mark will be different for each individual. But we all repeat patterns of behaviour that we are in denial about, or are not brave enough to confront. So how do we get passed it? The Cross is the answer. Bear your cross and crucify what is holding you back, and use the weight of that suffering, confronting it voluntarily, REMEMBER it and use it to propel you forward to project yourself and those around you in to a better future. To allow Gods manifestation to take place, to reach the Father, you need to do two things simultaneously. That is the contrast of your past suffering, feel the weight of it, but recognise it’s in the past, that you have voluntarily crucified this through the cross of Jesus, whilst simultaneously envisioning the potential future that could now be made manifest in PLACE OF THAT SIN that you has been removed. This is where the power of Gods manifestion fills your spirit and you release what you have been saved from!! When parts of your soul start to come alive again, that you thought were gone forever…?? Then tell me that God doesn’t exist… The power of God is real! The Power of the cross is real!! Everyone has a spirit that animates them, and causes them to repeat patterns of behaviour, see life through certain lenses.. The question I have for you sir is… are your numbers and equations going to give your soul and spirit the life it so desperately is crying out for when life gets tough and you need it to change?
@@SeanSk1lz When life gets tough, and I need it to change, then I have to take action to remedy it. You didn't address what the equation is saying. It's saying mass is required to do things in our universe. It requires power to do things. God with no mass has no power.
@@anthonyberard3507 there’s a much simpler rebuttal to your equation… anything that people can imagine can’t technically be disproved because there is always a chance that it’s possible. It’s entirely possible for a waterfall to flow backwards, or for cream in coffee to be removed once it’s stirred in, or for a shattered vase to randomly put itself back together. A). Things have a tendency to continue the pattern as we have come to know it, although within the pattern there are many things we don’t understand, but all the physics is there for the pattern to change, it’s possible, just highly improbable. B). Our instruments and minds have immense limitation and can only measure within the framework and bias of which they are invented. So actually, disproving God, or Santa, or the Easter bunny is impossible because all of them are technically possible, they can’t be entirely ruled out. Any physicist or scientist will tell you that.
@@anthonyberard3507 th-cam.com/video/ISUynYz93zY/w-d-xo.htmlsi=UJ-qXH37Uoba2is3
Give me an answer to this if consciousness is the state we are in when we are awake. How do you explain that when you are asleep and have a dream in that dream you can make decisions to do something or not?
When you are asleep, you are still conscious
@@oluwatobifaniyi I don't think we are conscious. Our scenes are still working but our actual cognitive thinking for what is happening outside our body is switched off, it seem to me we are only experiencing what our brains are creating from the information it's storing. This would explain why our dreams can be so confused, they are just a random selection of thought our brains are going through and trying to put in order.
What is reality? How do you know if you are asleep or not?
@@ryanhoffman5477 They say if you die in your sleep you will never awake .Therefore if you die you're awake .
@chrisbingham3289 Our five senses give us a filtered down version of reality. If you were to get the full version of light, sound, taste, and touch, it would be too overwhelming to the point that you couldn't navigate reality.
Philosophy has wrestled with the question of reality vs. consciousness for the past two thousand years. They have gotten nowhere.
"Those who look outside are asleep. Those who look inside are awake." C.G.Jung
On this side of the temporal, some people just don't want God and be separate from Him simply because they prefer to do what thou wilt... on the other side of the eternal, God will let them be separate from Him. Choose wisely by really studying and getting to know Him. If there's no God, no consequence. If there is, and He exists, then eternity is a very loooooooong time.
Matthew 13 🕊
Answering the first question:
Heaven and earth will pass away, but My Words will never pass away.
Jesus is the Word of God, the answer is: God is the always was and is and is to come.
I Am that I Am.
Word salad.
🤣🤣🤣 I LOOOVVE when people start saying word salad. There is nothing better to show how one can't defend what's being said... it shows that they just don't like it.
@@akaKRANNI It refers to that the person is speaking absolute nonsense that has either: nothing to do with the topic, using a lot of words to hide that they in fact said nothing, or gish galloping as they made a lot of unsubstantiated claims without backing any of them up with evidence.
To "defend what's being said", he quotes three quotes from the bible.
it's merely three claims in a set of books that claim they are divine.
"my holy book says this man is divine so it must be true"
Neither of the claims prove anything about jesus' supernatural claims being true.
The books have been changed over time, which is why there are so many interpretations and sects of christianity, so that is wrong.
"Jesus is the Word of God, the answer is: God is the always was and is and is to come."
So god is everything, great! that has no explanatory power. who caused this? God. Who did that? God. This explains nothing, only shifting the explanation to something you can also not explain.
"I am that I am"
woo, a deepity. I am also who I am.
This basically refers to everything with the law of identity. A = A
If you want to interpret it as some statement about his godhood. great, then it becomes, my book says it is true.
There, addressed all the bible quotes and I still think it is word salad as it still says nothing about the original topic.
Circular argument
No argument, truth us truth
Two guys arguing over the existence of the Easter bunny and Santa Claus. And if Jordan believes that Mat believes. Oh man. Word salad with vinegar and oil.
'Organized' religion started when different members of a tribe needed reach others help to perform large ritual celebrations.
Peterson is sophism personified. Strangely but not surprisingly, he lacks the self-awareness to realise this,
He's being deceptive without realizing that he's being deceptive?
damn the banter is great in this convo.. JBP is just that guy.... his brain is just on another lvl
Yeah, too many drugs.
He thinks his brain is on another level - not quite the same thing.
@@williamevans9426 your right its not, if you take the time to hear and attempt to understand the words and why the are being used. then again words right. next lvl thought process, don't agree with anyone for no reason but if ya try to understand why they pick the words used.. you can get a peek through the mask. god bless you and your brain is on another lvl CHEERS TO YOUR INTELEGENCE. MY LACK Of. oops
@@lukedegraaf1186 dont shame Mr Dillhunty for saying hes been high as a kite thats not kind, he was only responding to what JBP was explaining the study on mushrooms. wait you would have to fallow alone
@@alboe5both are as clueless as each other
In fact, it is Dillahunty vs someone that must clean his room first...😂
I would love to hear this conversation in 2024, as I think JP has grown a lot since then. As it stands now Matt clearly dominated and "won" this debate. For context, I'm a big fan of JP. Great work Matt I'm going to have to look into your material
I quit smoking by hypnosis
I quit smoking by stopping smoking
Jordan “The Word Salad” Peterson
cope
@@thespacedout loud incorrect buzzer sound
Lose the "The"
It seems like almost every jab at Jordan Peterson has the same inane, toothless quality that typically accompanies ad hominem attacks . . . lack of substance.
@@johnmoonitz2968 stop trying so hard 😂
you don’t get to think “ohh that’s self evident”, nothing is self evident to the skeptic.
banger line of argumentation
I love the idea of this debate should be really interesting
Could one of you tell me why said substrate is god instead of faith
Listening to JP talk is torture at the highest level! I thought this was Deepak Chopra's forte. He can't seem to answer a question directly without going on a tangent about things that in the end don't answer the question at all. To hell with William L. Craig! This guy makes him look like an amateur theologian. At least they kept it respectful and cordial.
JP's vocalising is more tolerable if you lift the speed to 1.25 or even 1.5
All are amateurs.
Anything on two legs
Matt is just a master skeptic. If truth were brought to him on a silver platter (which JP brought), he would question that the platter was supporting the truth, rather than accepting the truth as the gift. In elementary thought: he can’t see the forest for the trees
Which truth did he deliver?
False
Matt, why could u not properly respond to Jordan when confronted on his thoughts about atheism. I mean, seriously...
U answered with "I am an atheist and not a you know what...." You made this argument for applause only.
He had a very point and u ran away from it. U avoided it. U got small on the big stage. That is too bad.
Only a fool can say in their heart 'there is no God'. That is not the same as saying I don't believe the Christian testimony of God, it is saying there is no God and therefore we, that is we humans are god. To debate the existance of God with someone who says there is no God because of my faith in evolution is a fools errand. If anyone is genuinely seeking God, God will reveal Himself in the Person of Jesus the Christ those who have heard the Gospel of Jesus and reject Him have condenmed themselves to an eternity separate from God. That place is called hell. God will send NO ONE to hell, we have to send ourselves there and it is not because of our sin or misdeeds, it is our rejection of Jesus that sends us there. Don't be a fool.
the comments= haters gonna hate…
Best Pangburn event ever!
People with schizophrenia also report supernatural experiences
I thought the video froze
When Jordan Peterson realises he isn't the smartest guy in the room:
1. So we need to agree the concept, etymology, and contextual meaning of *every*single*word*in*every *sentence*
2. I've been thinking about this a lot and I have come to the conclusion I am correct.
3. In my years of practice... (regardless of the subject being discussed actually relating to his field of expertise)
4. Here's a 10 minute monologue about Dostoyevsky that has no correlation to this discussion but I think sounds impressive as fuck.
😂
This is not the most steel of men, but it isn’t bad.
Yea man who defines words and uses words by their definition.
What is a woman!
Matt: word salad!
Basically! Matt likes a hotdog in his chocolate pocket!
@TR13400 I'm assuming you haven't seen the clip where JP tries to get into the sentence 'do you believe in god' by asking
'What do you mean by do'
'What do you mean mean by you'
'What do you mean by believe'
'What do you mean by in'
'What do you mean by God'
Trying to find the meaning in 60% of a 5 word sentence when that 60% are very small common use words that are generally understood even by an average kindergartener is pretty ridiculous.
Matt said after this that Jordan's agent had told him to never debate Matt again after this. Wonder why? 😂
I was already on my way, but this discussion when it originally came out broke the Jordan Peterson spell for me. Peterson having an actually well-reasoned interlocutor, instead of silly news anchors and sensationalist ideologues, who actually challenged the substance of his positions was clearly uncomfortable for him, but more importantly rather damaging to unqualified promulgation of his positions.
Hard to know for sure, but it seems to me that this event contributed strongly to Peterson’s retreat into echo chambers he found favorable, where he stays now.
I know your question was humorously rhetorical, just giving my opinion on it.
@kristopherjon6496 i felt the exact same way. His lessons on growing up sounded profound. His message of independence and growing up contradicts his religiousness.
Why do you think ? And what tiktok clip did you hear this ? I saw matt rage quit a debate, so holding him up as an intellectual genius that is far better than JP is a lacking in your thinking.
@@joshuawoodin7 i bet you've never listened to what matt has to say.
@@jesterc.6763 well I don't see what listening to him means if your equating what the difference is ?
It’s very clear, that Peterson signed up for the scientifically unprovable side of the debate. God, that is. So that bearded fella up there is playing with a clear advantage. Being interested in the battle of intellect is why most people wanted to hear this. Unless you came in with a favorite
It looks like Jordan hates that when people are applauding matt 😮😅
Alan Watts and Terence McKenna, to me, would have made wonderful and very interesting friendly adversaries to Matt Dillahunty’s stance in this conversation. Both skeptics, but both aware of the spiritual recognition of the mystery of reality.
I appreciate this comment. Im in a strange land somewhere between terence mckenna, sam harris, and peterson.
@@johnsmithbro275 that sounds honestly like a beautiful place to be lol! Healthy skepticism potentiated by the beauty of the Spirit 🤍
Peterson's knowledge is quite impressive...
He's an amateur .so is the other one.
@@Soliloquy-gy6zfthey are both smart, one is more eloquent than the other, your comment lacks substance, but everyone is an amateur by your standard right ? You sound like an average neighborhood basketball player who says the NBA players are amateur. Your comment is the height of intellectuality that would make Einstein jealous.
@@joshuawoodin7 Einstein cannot think out the box.
Just an ape
@@joshuawoodin7 Einstein was ordinary.
Just another ape
@@joshuawoodin7 wind talker VS garden gnome.
Enjoy!🥳
Matt's a poser. His description of his "experience with the Holy Ghost" sounded contrived and made up. When JP asked him what that experience was like, I'll bet JP saw right through it. I'll bet JP has had a number of sessions with people who have described what they would have called an "experience with the Holy Ghost" and truly believed it and I'll bet it didn't sound this canned. Matt is so smug. Whether you agree with Jordan or not he raised some very good considerstions when talking about the possibility that people who took certain substances actually had supernatural event. It kind of smacked the arrogant smirk off of Matt's attitude. It is apparent that Matt loves perching up on that stage so full of himself. Nice to see someone speak with him who has done the hard thinking and research and believes deeply in the process of understanding truth and reality rather than bloating up his ego.
Science is great but can’t answer the most important questions.
Someone: Good morning Mr. Peterson,
JP: Well, the metaphysical substrate that determines our temporal dimension makes it impossible to know if mornings are more than just an internalized perception of my balls or something...
Hahahah you had me tearing with this one!!!
Matt sank Peterson's holy boat.
He's not even of the same calibre as JP...Nice fail...
@@In_Paradiso58No, Matt’s miles above Peterson, MILES.
Jordan's genius flew right over everyone's heads
Matt likes a hotdog in his chocolate pocket!
th-cam.com/video/ISUynYz93zY/w-d-xo.htmlsi=UJ-qXH37Uoba2is3
I don't think I would want either one of these guys explaining God to me, because neither one of them has a clue!!!
Its so refreshing to see how much Jordan cares about being accurate, as opposed to right, because there's an important difference.
This smackdown of Peterson will never get old. The fact that people buy the religious BS Jordan's been pushing for the past 6 years is absolutely wild to me.
Grow up man
Peterson seems to take an important insight about the 'religious' i.e. spiritual roots of civilization or at least human psychology and extrapolate it to all sorts of convoluted nonsequiter assertions.
"Smackdown of Peterson" ?? This was not a smackdown of either of these men. Just because you disagree with Peterson's views (or perhaps lack the cognitive ability to grasp what he is actually saying in any given moment), does not mean he was bested in any way.
I think this was an interesting conversation about an incredibly complex topic, and I would like to see more conversations like this.
@@johnmoonitz2968you know you don't have to scour the comments section of this video to defend your champion, Mr. JP.
If you are inclined, this is a re-upload. You can go find the original and argue with all the people calling him a whacko there too.
@@brockwhite8699JP has done more for young men than almost anyone in modern times and that’s because God blessed him with the ability to do so. It’s always interesting when people use click bait words like “smack down” or “destroyed” that have lost all meaning. A conversation doesn’t need or require someone being bested. You either agree or disagree. Unfortunately for most people they can’t accept that Jesus is the truth and the fact that Peterson grows ever closer to that realization brings him a lot of unwarranted hate. If you can’t see God in everything you’ve probably never spent an adequate amount of time stepping back and truly observing the world as a whole.
A couple of years ago when i was like 18, I always saw JP as an extremely intelligent man because he made all these sentences that made him sound like some sort of wisdom god. Now I understand his words and sentences alot better and it just seems like he's blending all sorts of intellectual soundbytes together without actually talking about anything or giving any clear thoughts or answers. How tf did I fall for this!?
Maybe you just thought you were smart enough to understand but turns out not.
If Peterson is the one you worry about between these two, you're on the wrong path, sir.
Or maybe when u were 18 u hadn’t been indoctrinated by college echo chambers yet 😂😂😂
Did you read his book Maps of Meaning or just watch videos?
No one person has all the answers. Some things he says might make perfect sense to you. Others things may not. That is how it's supposed to be. Unless of course you are looking for one person with all the answers. And if you are looking for that it means you do not have a mind of your own and will probably end up in a cult, or following a political ideology like a zombie, which is quite common these days.
If a man says he has never done wrong/sinned he is a liar, and the truth is not in him. Fear controls the atheists; they are afraid to admit they are sinners in need of God's Grace and Mercy (that's called pride - God resists the proud but gives Grace to the humble). We are born sinners; we do not have to teach a child how to do wrong/sin/lie. We have to teach them that lying is not a good thing, it is wrong/sinful. Children lie/sin to cover up their wrongdoing. Born with the capability to do so. Jesus Christ is our only hope. Our Living hope. Atheists, the world and the devil (Satan) offer no hope. Only trust, faith in Christ Jesus gives hope, peace, joy. To know him is eternal life. No religion needed. Just faith, faith plus nothing.
"Where there is design, there has to be a designer". DNA, the brain, the universe; are examples that even a child could easily understand. The design proposition for me, trumps all of the atheistic arguments as to whether there is a god.
What the heck is Jordan on with you can't quit smoking without taking a drug? I quit smoking after 15 years by moving across the country. It was enough of a change in environment to break all the old habits and triggers. No drugs or supernatural experience required. Just outgrew the addiction. Of course there were cravings but those were reduced and eliminated over time.
There must decided to stop smoking. I did after 20 years. All it took was a doctor who told me I would be unable to work at 60 years if I continued. The Doctor was also an insurance assessor. I think JP confused the issue. He often finds it necessary
He wasn't saying it's impossible to quit smoking, his point was that we haven't found an effective pharmaceutical to stop smoking. There isn't a medicine that makes you stop, but amazingly enough, mushrooms paired with the subjectively divine experience, seems to work. Which suggests that there's something physically real occuring in relation to the subjectively divine
@@timothyglassbrook4886 Why call it divine? I have used shrooms on numerous occasions and the experience has been all in my head the entire time.
Your subconcious and concious seem to blend together, you can think very clearly and become hyper focused on your own body.
I can also still remember all the halucinations I have had in every trip.
Nothing of that has to be described as "subjectively divine" just call it "subjective experience".
This is exactly the "Woo woo" language that people ascribe to JP, as he smuggles in words of his preconceived notions into these discussions.
My brother stopped smoking due to his partner wanting him to stop.
He has since stopped snoring, being short of breath, stopped coughing.
JP is one of those christians that wants to have these things be "magical" in some way so they can cling to the last remaining areas of faith.
The last few things that science cannot easily test: conciousness and the grounding of reality.
Yeah, you truly didn't get him.
Don't limit supernatural to mean only drugs, but rather any other form of external interventions.
Listen from 15:15 to 15:50, he expanded on what it could mean.
He didn’t say that you can’t, but that A psychedelic experience has resulted in a significant amount of people quitting smoking, when there is no pharmaceutical mechanism for the change in behavior. It’s an example of what some may call a spiritual experience.
Dissecting Peterson's word salad is almost impossible for philosophers that are versed in this "metaphysical" slush. Matt is a very pragmatic guy, the exact opposite of Peterson, which makes it very impressive that he can even have a digestible conversation with him at all.
Jordan lobster Peterson uses Socrates' strategy of deconstructing sentences to confuse his interactor. But like magicarp it has no effect on people that realize this.
For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain” appears in the King James Version of the Bible in Philippians 1:21 and this is why Matt will ever understand God or faith or what it is to live
Peterson’s wife recently recovered from cancer. I’m so happy she accepted medical treatment even though they both have only spoken on the subject to give credit to their Catholic God rather than the science behind her cure. I’m sure Peterson would agree that his wife’s survival was better than her death for his own wellbeing and for hers.
noooo that’s not what he said haha😊
Peterson: death is preferable to life because you “stop suffering” is not a presupposition he would offer his wife and not a starting point he considered. He sounds like he is arguing just to be controversial. Matt is making logical, reasonable points and Peterson just wants to be argumentative because he thinks it makes him look intelligent
@@daisyl2629I am an atheist and I think Jordan is way above Matt’s level.
That's hardly an accurate representation of what happened. They're not dismissing the science that saved her, the fact that she's the only person they've ever recorded that has recovered from her specific type of cancer was miraculous to her and her process of recovery led her to her faith.
@@timothyglassbrook4886I’m not taking away from her remarkable experience but I am forced to take it all with a bit of skepticism. I think they were fortunate enough to discover the cancer during her other surgery when normally it’s so fast growing that it kills a person before they even realise they have it. They were lucky in this regard.
But I also have to say the accounts of JPs hospitalisation over his bezo treatment make me doubt so much about this man’s integrity and formulation of reality. It leads me to question so much of his reporting of events and how he even conceptualises the world at all.
I think the bottom line is that Jordan Peterson feels that religion is useful and necessary in order to govern people, but he goes to great lengths to avoid the question of whether religious claims are objectively true. He is a master at question dodging and redirection.
I think he can't afford to be totally honest about the subject because of alliances that keep him relevant.
Yes many have blown their own Trumpets and their own walls comes crushing down in front! Physical strength exalting themselves above!
Peterson is a freestyle battle rapper 😂
Did you notice that Matt reworded, or put into his own words, every one of Jordan's arguments before he made his rebuttal. This is how you argue a strawman. Substituting words is also a key component in neurolinguistic programming.
This was one of the best conversations I've heard in a long time. I would love to hear these two speak together again.
Unfortunately they will never debate each other again. Petersons advisors informed him after this to never debate matt again because it went badly for him.
@@ginocavalieri6121it’s crazy how many people just can’t listen and ponder.there stupid to have to ideas running through there head
Why? It might as well be titles "Word Salad vs. Critical Thinking"
I dunno, I thought Peterson did Ok. I didn't understand much of what he was saying but the talk didn't feel like a conflict where one lost and the other won.
@@Mike-ii5zrthat's normal friend. He talks in the wind
"False teachers of life use flowery words and start nonsense."
The Way of Life, According to Lao Tzu - Wytter Bynner (my favorite translation of the Tao)
A wonderful conversation. I am a little disappointed in Matt not saying Ghost in the shell, instead of ghost in the machine. Alas, missed opportunities.
idk why everyone criticizes JP here… maybe they feel like he attacks their standard of thinking and tries to shake their ground for their own good to revise if they do in fact stand on solid ground.
IMHO
Or maybe it’s because instead of answering a simple question, he talks in circles using language to disguise the fact that he’s avoiding the question and not actually answering it.
He doesn’t want to say “I don’t believe in a literal, actual god.” because he has a lot of followers who are Christians. Even though that is in fact Jordan’s stance (he admits it elsewhere in other videos).
So instead of just saying so, he questions every part of the question itself, speaks in circles, uses large words that he knows a majority of his supporters won’t understand, and never actually gives a straight answer.
It’s how he handles most questions that he doesn’t want to give a straight answer to. He’s not dumb, just purposefully avoiding real answers.
I still do not know what his position is. I know he believes in god from his past interviews and debates but he paints the picture of God as a set of beliefs that are different from person to person. It is so wishy washy that it does not seem like a position that one can stand on with confidence or evidence. So if I never have these out of body religious experiences does that mean god does not exist, I am not a human or I have no idea what it means. Also if all my beliefs came from God and all my beliefs are my god then is that not circular reasoning? It looks like he has created a God that is so fluid and undefined that you could never debate his value or existence.