Jordan Peterson Takes On 20 Atheists

[Mike]

This is quite a fun and entertaining video! It's part of a trend that places prominent conservative/heterodox thinkers in a room with a crowd of woke super nerds to hash out social and political - and in this case - religious issues of the day.

It gets very tense in spots, even contentious, but is generally surprisingly productive and civil.

I've watched many of these videos and the same cast of characters turn up to these events to debate. To their credit, they're very bright and capable debaters, which makes for dramatic intellectual sparring and a space for both sides to perhaps learn from the other.

Peterson is a master of Christian apologetics ..even though he refuses to call himself a Christian when asked (I think his reasoning is very valid for this). But these young atheists can be pretty formidable too, and they hold their own for the most part.

About an hour and a half long:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Pwk5MPE_6zE

[Delight]

Some highlights from One UNBeliever to 20 Others?

[Mike]

Posted by Delight (here)
Some highlights from One UNBeliever to 20 Others?

Click-baity video there. Another shameless attention seeker. Without context the videos here are pretty useless.

There was one prick kid, and he wasn't an accurate representation of all the other interactions.

It comes in long at an hour and a half, I get it, but you have to watch more than 1 minute of it to know what's truly going on there.

[Gemma13]

I nearly bailed on this one Mike, but it was worth sticking it out to enjoy adults in the room morph their debates into conversations you don’t want to end.

Must admit it amuses me that people even bother entering this type of intellectual speed dating on steroids type thing… hmm, okay, I’d like to go out to dinner with you… I’d likely enjoy coffee with you… I think you lot over there would be great in an Alpha Christian forum… and you… ya little c***… let’s go for a beer. Now. And bring along the retarded babbling encyclopaedia that’s in desperate need of fresh air.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

I did bail on this -- so sorry -- but one of the few things that grinds my gears beyond recovery is the spiritually retarded - or "atheists". Again, truly sorry if I've offended anyone by using such a strong pejorative, but I cannot cope with the cringe factor here, it's off my personal scale. These people are, for me, are even more retarded -- oops, I said it again -- than flat earthers. Infinitely more.

I would rather sit through four hours of kids debating, nay, screaming, panting, and frothing that 2+2 = 5 dammit! than watch them argue the non-existence of Spirit, of God, of which ALL-THINGS-ARE-MADE, including their stupid selves.

[Open Minded Dude]

Posted by Mark (Star Mariner) (here)
I did bail on this -- so sorry -- but one of the few things that grinds my gears beyond recovery is the spiritually retarded - or "atheists". Again, truly sorry if I've offended anyone by using such a strong pejorative, but I cannot cope with the cringe factor here, it's off my personal scale. These people are, for me, are even more retarded -- oops, I said it again -- than flat earthers. Infinitely more.

I would rather sit through four hours of kids debating, nay, screaming, panting, and frothing that 2+2 = 5 dammit! than watch them argue the non-existence of Spirit, of God, of which ALL-THINGS-ARE-MADE, including their stupid selves.

For me it's hard to watch both sides of the 'aisle'. It's because it shows how society is trapped in a 'false dichotomy'. Religionism vs. Atheism, both are dogmatic belief systems. To me both are childish. I just cannot watch these discussions. I know Jordan is a highly intelligent man who otherwise has some good views and knows how to articulate them. And his opponents are certainly also intelligent talkers. But for me they are all trapped in their little boxes they cannot even consider to look out of. Reality is different from just tow religious dogmas clashing. Vastly different. However it is I cannot surely say but it is not THIS.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Without watching the debate, I'll risk saying that Peterson isn't qualified to fight his corner. For one, he doesn't commit to being a Christian anyway. Two, he's trapped (one imagines) in the very false dichotomy you declaimed, Open Minded Dude. Religion. Which knows nothing at all of 'God', the Infinite Allness -- nothing.

Spirituality/Religion, the two are chalk and cheese.

[Mike]

Posted by Mark (Star Mariner) (here)
Without watching the debate, I'll risk saying that Peterson isn't qualified to fight his corner. For one, he doesn't commit to being a Christian anyway. Two, he's trapped (one imagines) in the very false dichotomy you declaimed, Open Minded Dude. Religion. Which knows nothing at all of 'God', the Infinite Allness -- nothing.

Spirituality/Religion, the two are chalk and cheese.

Attachment 55219

hey Mark, Peterson doesn't commit to saying he's a Christian because - to reduce his argument into a small sound bite - it's too easy to simply declare you believe in God. It's too easy to declare oneself a Christian. Belief is demonstrated thru action, in his eyes (and mine), and the majority of people who declare a belief in God, or Christianity, or some vague kind of spirituality, are very rarely demonstrating that alleged belief thru their behavior.

By openly declaring such things, you get points for virtue without ever having demonstrated virtue.

His answer frustrates alotta people, and I get that, but it makes perfect sense to me.

I can't say for certain that spirituality is a personal relationship with the divine because that word is too vague imo. It depends on what you mean by it I s'pose. I know what Christianity means exactly, so I can make that judgement. But I don't know what spirituality means. I don't think anybody does. If everyone here was tasked with defining that term, we'd get a million different answers. For that reason I don't find the term useful

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

All fairly said mate. But the meaning of spirituality is quite simple. It's knowledge. The only thing that differs is how people arrived at that knowledge, and their understanding of it.

This is how I view Spirituality -

or, let's call it 'Why I see things spiritually':

-I've had approximately one thousand lives, and I'm aware of at least three of them based on memories. In two, I know who I was, where I lived, and approximately when.
-I've been regressed to an existence between lives, too. Death is not the end (far from it).
-I've had out of body experiences. I know my consciousness can exist separate from my body.
-I've had paranormal happenings too numerous to count.
-I know I'm immortal. My spirit has always existed and shall always exist. The same goes for all souls.
-A soul is a particle of God that's been given individuality.
-The goal is to endow that individuality with experience, and thus improve ourselves.
-Experience is gained by living material lives.
-Experience builds wisdom; and wisdom, mastery. With that mastery, we become Creators, and enrich Creation with our individuality.

On the other hand, religion is just 'belief', and belief is derived from dogma. It was written by human beings and is designed to control you. People use it as a crutch to lean on in the absence of spiritual knowledge.

[Mike]

So Christianity has a dogmatic side and a mystical/spiritual side. That's how it orders itself. Because dogma in this context really means something like boundaries, or order. We're all sort of allergic to the word "dogma", but without boundaries and order all we have is chaos. We need rules to maintain order. Otherwise we just have an unending, formless nothingness.

The idea of spirituality - on its own - as it's often presented to me, is kind of nebulous and vague. It represents the mystical side of Christianity without any of the organizing factors (dogma). That total freedom from dogma appeals to us all superficially, until we realize how easily it veers off into chaos.

I'm thinking of the Taoist "ying/yang" symbol. I think a proper life is one that is as near balanced between order and disorder as possible. While Christians rarely succeed in achieving that, they at least have a framework for it. Spirituality on its own operates sort of willy-nilly, offering an endless buffet table of this and that, with no directions or boundaries to guide us.

The Christian faith, which is not without its faults, has been excessively dogmatic at times. It scares some people away. But it's no excuse to completely disregard dogma. But that's precisely how I view what we're calling "spirituality" here.

In our life here on earth, the overt mystical/spiritual stuff only represents a fraction of our experiences. The rest of the time we're lugging these bodies around, trying to figure out how to think and behave. Christianity offers a framework for that.

Spirituality without dogma is more of a running away from something that a running towards something imo.

I've spent my life reading about and talking about all the very cool stuff you listed in your post. And I'll continue to do that. I love it! And I'm glad you mentioned God, because most spiritual people don't (or they cloak God in various monikers like "the universe" or "life force" or something like this). Because all those experiences are wonderful and adventurous and thrilling, but if we're not oriented towards God they're ultimately just distractions. Christianity offers that orientation, which some call dogma, but which I see as necessary to remain mentally ordered and coherent and in alignment.

Here's the funny thing: I don't know if I'm truly a Christian! I was raised Catholic, but I haven't been to mass in ages, or confessed in ages, or prayed much etc. I'm not trying to sound like Peterson here, but I don't think I have the right to call myself a Catholic when I've been so lax about practicing (and it is a practice, full of endless ritual and experiences..not merely a blind faith).

And I do, admittedly, have many conflicts with the church.. like the idea reincarnation for instance. And a list of others.