what do you disagree about with Peterson? You mentioned Peterson's conception of the high school shooters is saying they are objecting to God, and you said well that's correct in some sense. There are many, many aspects where I don't uh really agree with Peterson. It's I just

referred to him because he uh is one of the few public intellectuals we have left, for better or worse, right? I'm curious what ways do you defer? We talked about Dennett and you, you said you disagree with him in some sense because he's incomplete. What about Peterson?

that's more commission, right? That's more old mission rather than combination. Uh, I refer to Peterson because he is a common point of reference. We all know about him right now. No, that's fine, that's fine, but I'm curious where you disagree, so um

and where you agree. Yes, so uh, yeah, the interesting thing is for for me when I have to talk about disagreement because disagreement is the default state between minds, isn't it? It's only where we can establish agreement when we are independent thinkers where we see that

we uh understand things in the same way. So uh, Peterson thinks that the best way to interact with a cult that tries to be state religion with some kind of aggregor is to make a stand and to expose yourself, and uh I am not sure if I agree with that, so

basically he is fighting a culture war in an ineffectual way. I think there is also a deeper level. Um, Peterson thinks that growing up consists in making a sacrifice, and the sacrifice is self-actualization. He would like to be happy, but he cannot

afford to be happy, but it was incompatible with being an adult and doing the things that adults have to do, and his sacrifice is incomplete. He has not sacrificed his need for self-actualization, and that's why he appears to be so bitter.

Right, if he had made the sacrifice, he wouldn't be bitter. Would sacrifice of self-actualization, yes. So, uh, he would become a priest. He would have that serene state of somebody who has not lost anything because he doesn't need anything, what he

doesn't have, right? This, if you look at the archetypal priest, it's a person that is serene, that is smiling because they are at peace with themselves and the world, and they might be suffering momentarily because the unbelievers crucify him, but apart

from the moments of, uh, acute pain or the moments of compassion for their flock when they are involved in their dealings with the world and try to help them and fail at doing so because not all things can be helped, right? The priest is supposed to be okay with what he does

and Peterson is not okay with what he does. He is suffering because he, uh, has retained his identity, that the one that he thinks he has, uh, sacrificed. He hasn't. Yes, basically trying to understand, I'm trying to understand this, so you're

saying that he has an identity, and because he's holding on to it, it's like a want, and you should get rid of your wants, and then you'll be placid and serene and tranquil. Yes, so he basically is doing something that he has not fully internalized.

himself, he is expressing the tension between what he thinks he needs to be doing and what he does, what he feels would reward him for doing that right. He he feels pain in doing what he does, and uh, there is, of course, this other thing that he is acting on certain incentives in

this game, and the question is, are these incentives completely pure? So he is a publicist that is filling a certain niche, a certain vacuum. He is trying to give people values, uh, he's trying to project authority in a time that needs authority, and he

might not be projecting exactly the right authority or fitting authority, but he's interacting with the fact that the millennials are the first generation since the post-war generation that are authoritarian again, right? Every generation after World War II was liberal

Joscha Bach on Jordan Peterson

TOE Clippings

조던 피터슨과의 초기 의견 불일치

발표자는 피터슨의 고등학교 총격범에 대한 개념에 동의하지 않는다고 언급합니다.

발표자는 피터슨의 공적 지위 때문에 그를 참고인으로 선택했다고 설명합니다.

발표자는 Peterson을 공통 참조 지점으로 사용한다고 명확히 설명합니다.

발표자는 의견 불일치가 독립적인 마음 사이의 기본 상태라고 말합니다.

컬트 및 문화 전쟁 대응에 대한 의견 불일치

연사는 국가 종교가 되려는 사이비 종교에 대처하는 피터슨의 접근 방식에 의문을 제기합니다.

피터슨의 성장과 희생에 대한 개념

연사는 성장을 희생의 과정, 특히 자아실현의 과정으로 보는 피터슨의 관점에 대해 이야기합니다.

연사는 피터슨의 괴로움은 자아실현을 위한 불완전한 희생에서 비롯된 것이라고 제안합니다.

화자는 완전한 희생을 통해 고요한 상태에 도달한 사람으로 성직자를 예로 들어 설명합니다.

발표자가 피터슨의 내부 갈등에 대한 해석을 요약합니다.

Peterson의 동기 부여 및 인센티브

연사는 피터슨의 행동이 자신이 해야 할 일과 자신이 원하는 일 사이의 긴장감에서 비롯된 것으로 분석합니다.

연사는 피터슨의 인센티브의 순수성에 의문을 제기하며 공인의 측면을 시사합니다.

연사가 도움이 필요한 시기에 가치와 권위를 제공하는 Peterson의 역할에 대해 이야기합니다.

연사는 밀레니얼 세대 사이에서 권위주의가 다시 돌아오고 있다고 지적합니다.