Opinion Sam Harris Vs Jordan Peterson - Who won?

[Bob Gray]

Can't watch on my phone at the moment. Is this the first debate from a few years back? I remember that basically being Sam Harris being unable to move on for their disagreement about the nature of.....hmmmm....something or other. Peterson kept wanting to move on to a different topic because he didn't see how they'd change each other's minds, but Harris couldn't let it go and it was a dissapointing debate because of it. Never watched any of the others.

In general I find Harris to be by far the most foolish of the new atheist voices. Unless he's talking about Islam. Then somehow he's spot on usually. It's kinda weird how he can be so accurate a out a religion mostly located halfway across the world and so ignorant about the religion that surrounds him every day.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

Jordan Peterson hasn’t gone away yet?

 

[IGotAHugePeckah]

I like Peterson but can only take him and his "air leaking slowly out of a balloon" voice in small doses.

 

[ultramanhyata]

Don't know if you are aware but they are both liberal/progressive...

Herp!

 

[Unknown Pleasures]

I'm athiest so I always side with Harris on this topic. Life would be so much easier without religion. However, as I get older/wiser...there are some things that religion just kind either stumbled on by accident or otherwise that seem to make society better if followed correctly. Topics like pro life/pro choice. It becomes so much clearer and easier to understand when you look at the situation logically/scientifically - black and white - without nuance. When you do, you find you align with what religion says about it.

Religion offers a sort of structure that people need. The problem is that we get radically tied to our own individual groups and are very aggressive towards those who think differently. The human species is very tribal. I think that will be our downfall in the end. So we need religion, but in the end it will be our destruction.

geez.

Hmmm, oddly, I am in virtually full agreement with this, as I'm a staunch atheist as well. Though a bit more optimistic on the fate humanity... just a bit though. At the end of the day we will use up the planet and it won't be as nice as it has been. I will blame religion of worshipping that $$$$. But 100% on everything else... including (gasp) abortion.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

I can't imagine listening to Sam Harris on purpose.

 

[Trotsky]

Meh, it wasn't that bad (the probably 20 minutes total that I listened to in random spots). Peterson struggled to actually make points, but I think he's actually kind of slow to register and respond to criticisms, and Harris was being somewhat curt, so I think it was often the case that Peterson would start waxing in order to give himself time to collect himself and then would forget Harris' point and end up meandering through shitty arguments.

I can't imagine listening to Sam Harris on purpose.

Would much rather listen to him than Peterson. Peterson is insufferable both in style and substance. Harris is very rarely insightful at least. Harris just constantly pans in and out and makes meta commentary about the discussion and tries to posture for a point that never comes. They both are super annoying in needlessly using (often ill-fitting) big words to dress up simple arguments.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Meh, it wasn't that bad (the probably 20 minutes total that I listened to in random spots). Peterson struggled to actually make points, but I think he's actually kind of slow to register and respond to criticisms, and Harris was being somewhat curt, so I think it was often the case that Peterson would start waxing in order to give himself time to collect himself and then would forget Harris' point and end up meandering through shitty arguments.



Would much rather listen to him than Peterson. Peterson is insufferable both in style and substance. Harris is very rarely insightful at least. Harris just constantly pans in and out and makes meta commentary about the discussion and tries to posture for a point that never comes. They both are super annoying in needlessly using (often ill-fitting) big words to dress up simple arguments.

Harris is a phony and much less interesting. Peterson is fine so long as he stays in his lane.

 

[Seano]

I'm athiest so I always side with Harris on this topic. Life would be so much easier without religion. However, as I get older/wiser...there are some things that religion just kind either stumbled on by accident or otherwise that seem to make society better if followed correctly. Topics like pro life/pro choice. It becomes so much clearer and easier to understand when you look at the situation logically/scientifically - black and white - without nuance. When you do, you find you align with what religion says about it.

Religion offers a sort of structure that people need. The problem is that we get radically tied to our own individual groups and are very aggressive towards those who think differently. The human species is very tribal. I think that will be our downfall in the end. So we need religion, but in the end it will be our destruction.

geez.

Religion works quite well in a bubble and in civilized society. Church used to bring communities together, for example. There's less and less of that with each passing year.

Honestly, veering off topic a little here, I haven't seen an improvement in American society as religion has become less prevalent. Just my opinion. I'm not a religious person, either.

 

[djacobox372]

Harris by not being a bombastic deflector.

 

[jeffk]

Havn't watched but I find Harris's arguements against religion almost juvenile an narrow sighted. Matt dillihanty's debate with Peterson against religion was good.

Peterson said some bizarre stuff in the Dillahunty discussion. It has been some time since I watched it but I remember and know Dillahunty knows a lot more about Christianity by a long way and Dillahunty was really good in the post show little talk he did.

 

[jeffk]

Harris and Peterson did a bunch of talks when Pangburn thought he could go big on this. I couldn't make it through all of them.

I like Peterson when he sticks to psychology but he loses me when he talks about religion. I did get a laugh when he had Pinker on his show in a recently released video that seemed like it was taped a while back and where Peterson tried to talk up the Judeo Christian framework of values being the backbone for enlightenment values and Pinker shot that down as being as important as Peterson tried to make them.