For the record: I didn't title the article. (But "catastrophic" isn't far off.)
I disagree with @jordanbpeterson on many important points, but he is well worth engaging with an open mind. This was a nearly terminal case of close-mindedness.https://twitter.com/SamHarrisOrg/status/953779268919599105 …
-
-
You haven't changed your tune on this one iota. I've been watching his videos, just to catch up, and must consider the possibility that you lack context for your basic difference with JBP. He provides an evolutionary theory basis that makes sense.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I’m not sure Peterson believes his own description of his epistemology on all subjects. I think he uses the Darwinian/theist approach to justify his religion and traditionalist gender values, but he seems to switch to an enlightenment model when discussing clin psych literature
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Well, your problem there is Jordan doesn't agree there is such a thing as "true" especially where it conflicts with his feelings and especially his religious feelings. Sam Harris eviscerated him on this
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Precisely. Doing so only helps destroy one's own credibility, rather than the credibility of the one making the valid argument. If, as
@Atticus_Amber suggests, someone is right for the wrong reason, then one needs only to underscore why that is, instead of engaging dishonestly.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.