Sam and @jordanbpeterson. The compromise is to make a screenplay based on The Moral Landscape, complete with Dragons and lobsters. Maybe a trilogy?
-
-
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
JP calls himself a scientist but he leans on literary figures, flakey philosophers and obscurantism. After hours of listening to him, his schtick seems to be that old stories have magic properties
-
Tweet unavailable
-
If you ignore all the nasty stories. By which criteria are you sorting the wheat from the chaff? In other words you don't need the stories if you already possess a system of discrimination between the useful and antiquated stories
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
I have noticed on various occasions
@jordanbpeterson says he’s “getting tired” when speaking with@SamHarrisOrg for a couple of hours? Is this because of his high carnivorous diet? -
It's because thinking is exhausting, if you practice it. It's similar to you listening to a difficult lecture for hours. You'll lose focus at some point & need a break. The difference is, people on stage usually can't just just take a break but keep getting exhausted.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
While these talks were nice lessons in how people who disagree can have civil conversations, beyond that I’m not sure how useful they are at making the world a better place. Theocrats in our governments are more fundamentalist in their views and they’re gaining ground/making laws
-
The fact that this type of long form dialogue is becoming popular, through these two admirable exponents, in itself makes the world a better place. A welcome break from dishonesty, trivia and spite. Much needed at present.
-
I agree with your point. It’s a seperate point to the one I was trying to make though. Maybe I didn’t make mine clear enough.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@SamHarrisOrg I understand you want to have friendly and honest discussions. Still I think, you have to at least try to reveal BS next time ask JP about - man made climate change - how quitting smoking while on mushrooms constitutes "sort of proof" for the supernatural and so onThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
There has to be someone better than Pangburn to do this shit. The guy is a weasel.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
How great would it be to have this debate with Richard Rorty? To have been a fly on the wall during those office hours.
-
Is there anyone out there who can represent Rorty's position nearly as well as he did?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I’ve enjoyed everything you and Jordan Peterson have produced together, but I can’t help feel that he is 60-70% charlatan
-
Maybe you're not thinking complex enough then. Almost everything in life is extremely complex & simplified by us, so that we don't get overwhelmed. A lot of people keep working with the simplified version of things, while others try to work with the complex.
-
Tell me, how does one “think complex”?
-
You look beyond the surface & break down the oversimplifications. Let's say you have a serial killer. On the surface they are simply "a bad person, that murdered other people & deserves punished". And when you analyse deeper, you'll find psychological abuse & reasoning for
-
their actions. The latter would be helpful outside of serial killers & paints a much different picture than just the surface. You can try to "find a different viewpoint" or a more detailed one on pretty much anything.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.