Queue the smug Harris cult comments.
-
-
-
Lighten up. Geez.
-
Saying this based on the comments from the original podcast post. Lots of unnecessary insults thrown at Peterson.
-
I'm sure a few were justified. He mocks SJWs for stretching 'gender', now some mock him for stretching 'truth'.
-
It's not 'stretching truth'. It boiled down to a debate about pragmatism. Everything else is just semantics.
-
You think Peterson was criticized unjustly.... And you have
#empiricism in your profile... Lmfao the irony. -
Semantics argument was certainly useless-At its core it was just a debate abt pragmatism / operationalization
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
how many hours of mindfulness practice did it take to carry that conversation with Jordan Peterson without losing your shit?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I didn't get this until after I listened to the podcast hahaha
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Sam, ask yourself why Jordan can go on a dozen podcasts and the only conversation that breaks down is yours
-
It's because sam is better at critical thinking.
-
Sam should have asked "What would convince u ur wrong?"
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Why can't you simply agree that truth is what corresponds to ultimate reality & move on?
-
Because Peterson thinks that naming the Presidents in the wrong order is True if you survive.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Listening to this now
@jordanbpeterson, pragmatism is a bait and switch. "Is P true" and "Is P useful" are both epistemic P's.@SamHarrisOrg -
Have you finished it yet?
-
Not yet. 40 mins in.
-
Yea that tweet felt like a 40-minute-in tweet. JUST WAIT!
-
Yeah, I'm an hour in and this seems like ~90% manufactured complexity. Truth=truth useful=useful. @uniquehoge
@jordanbpeterson@SamHarrisOrg -
It doesn't really get better. Jordan nice guy, tho, at least. But I found 2nd half at least as painful. Slogged to end, tho!
-
Also, at one point JBP says "that's true!" to something SH says. And I wondered, how can he make that claim?! :-)
-
Yep, every propositional statement he makes in the podcast is subject to this conflict. It's a core problem w/pragmatism
- 8 more replies
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.